Cypress College 2011 Institutional Self Study in Support of Reaffirmation of Accreditation by Cypress College

Cypress College 2011 Institutional Self Study In Support of Reaffirmation of Accreditation March 2011

Submitted in Support of Reaffirmation of Accreditation to the Western Association of Schools and Colleges Accrediting Commission of Community and Junior Colleges

Submitted by Cypress College 9200 Valley View Street Cypress, CA 90630 www.cypresscollege.edu

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

Cypress College

North Orange County Community College District

Dr. Ned Doffoney, Chancellor Board of Trustees Jeffrey P. Brown Barbara Dunsheath Leonard Lahtinen Michael B. Matsuda Molly McClanahan Donna Miller M. Tony Ontiveros Ryan Billings, Student Trustee, Cypress College Natalie Baek, Student Trustee, Fullerton College

Dr. Michael J. Kasler, President Cypress College

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS Introductory Documents

Certification of Institutional Self Study........................................................................................1

History of the College...................................................................................................................3

Demographics and Data...............................................................................................................5

SLOs............................................................................................................................................15

Program Review..........................................................................................................................20

Abstract of the Report................................................................................................................23

Organization for the Self Study 2011.........................................................................................25

Accreditation Self Study Timeline..............................................................................................29

Organizational Structure.............................................................................................................31

10.

Certification of Continued Compliance with Eligibility Requirements......................................34

11.

Response to the Previous Team Recommendations, 2005..........................................................38

12.

Functional Map...........................................................................................................................51

Standard I

INSTITUTIONAL MISSION AND EFFECTIVENESS

IA:

Mission........................................................................................................................................59

IB:

Improving Institutional Effectiveness..........................................................................................68

Standard II S T U D E N T L E A R N I N G P R O G R A M S A N D S E R V I C E S

IIA:

Instructional Programs................................................................................................................99

IIB:

Student Support Services..........................................................................................................134

IIC:

Library and Learning Support Services....................................................................................157

Cypress College

Standard III R E S O U R C E S

IIIA:

Human Resources.....................................................................................................................169

IIIB:

Physical Resources.....................................................................................................................188

IIIC:

Technology Resources...............................................................................................................197

IIID:

Financial Resources...................................................................................................................215

Standard IV L E A D E R S H I P A N D G O V E R N A N C E

IVA:

Decision-Making Roles and Processes.......................................................................................235

IVB:

Board and Administrative Organization...................................................................................247

Summary of Planning Agendas

. .................................................................................................................................................267

Campus Maps

. .................................................................................................................................................269

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

Introductory Documents

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

vii

CERTIFICATION OF INSTITUTIONAL SELF STUDY DATE: TO:

Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, Western Association of Schools and Colleges

FROM: Cypress College 9200 Valley View Street, Cypress, CA 90630 This Comprehensive Institutional Self Study Report is submitted for the purpose of assisting in the determination of the institutionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s accreditation status. We certify that there was broad participation by the campus community, and we believe the Self Study Report accurately reflects the nature and substance of the institution. Signed

Barbara Dunsheath, President Board of Trustees

Dr. Ned Doffoney, Chancellor North Orange County Community College District

Dr. Michael Kasler, President Cypress College

Dr. Santanu Bandyopadhyay Director, Institutional Research and Planning Accreditation Liaison Officer

Cherie Dickey Accreditation Self Study Chair

Dr. Pat Ganer Academic Senate President

Rod Lusch CSEA Representative

Danial Shakeri President, Associated Students

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

History of the College Student success has remained as the keystone commitment of the College since its inception. The College was founded in 1966 as the second major educational institution of the District. It has grown from its initial configuration of temporary structures to the current 110-acre campus with 25 significant buildings. The College serves over 16,000 students per semester, providing excellence in academic, career/technical, and personal development offerings. The College has developed dynamic academic, physical, and technological infrastructures to help students keep abreast of an ever-changing economic environment.

Physical Infrastructure The current infrastructure of the College includes a 110-acre campus in the City of Cypress. Out of the 25 buildings, two are dedicated to administration and student services, and one for library and learning resources. The rest include both classroom and administrative facilities. Over the last five years, the campus has completed construction and renovation of several buildings. The Library and Learning Resource Center and the renovation of the Humanities building are among the most recent that were added to the campus. The remodeled building was rededicated in Spring 2010 and houses the Language Arts and Social Science Divisions of the College. The last phase of construction ended in Fall 2008, with the exception of the Humanities building. The present infrastructure provides adequate physical space to accommodate the current enrollment of nearly 16,000 students. With the current economic scenario, no major construction is under way at the present time. However, with more students enrolling in colleges, Cypress College has also experienced sharp growth in its enrollment over the last few years. To keep up with the increased demand, the planning for new facilities remains a continued priority for the institution. Facilities planning is complex and long-term as it involves projecting the potential growth in enrollment, anticipating student mix (part time vs. full time) and estimating class-taking patterns (online/hybrid vs. classroom). Cypress College is aware of the challenges involved in predicting the growth in these areas. Under the leadership of the North Orange County Community College District, an Educational and Facilities Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

Master Plan is being developed to anticipate and fulfill the future needs of students. The Educational and Facilities Master Plan for the North Orange County Community College District brings the emerging enrollment patterns and facilities requirements together. The plan was started in Fall 2009 and includes participation by all campus constituencies. The plan is being developed by an external consulting firm under the active leadership from the District and involvement from the campuses. Several meetings took place at the District as well as at the Campus. The plan is expected to be completed and presented for approval in Spring 2011. Once completed, this will serve as the blueprint for future developments of the College.

Academic Infrastructure Cypress College currently employs over 850 staff, including over 500 faculty (both full-time and part-time). The College continues to engage its faculty and staff to improve teaching, learning, and assessment opportunities. In the last five years, notable advancements have been made in program review, student learning outcomes, and assessment. Although program review has been in place since the early 1990s, the process has been strengthened over the last few years to connect the reviews to budget and resource allocations. This process is discussed in detail in the section under Program Review. In its current form, the process not only links assessment results with funding decisions, but also evaluates the process to identify areas for improvement. Another major development in recent years is defining and assessing student learning outcomes at the course level, and defining both program and General Education and Basic Skills Program Learning Outcomes (GE & Basic Skills PLOs). Major advancements have been made in the area of assessment as the assessment methods are defined for 82% of all courses and the assessment reports (closing the loop) are completed for 48% of all courses. The other major development in the area includes purchase, implementation, and use of a centralized assessment management software, TracDat. The software was purchased to house all SLOs and their results, to consolidate reporting, and to use the information to strengthen program review. The software will also be used to assess alignment of SLOs with the institutional 3

mission and strategic plan. This is discussed further in the SLO section.

Technological Infrastructure With the advancement of technology and distance education, the need for a superior technological infrastructure was tantamount. The College, despite the continued budget crisis, allocated resources in this area to provide the support that students need to learn and faculty need to teach. Technological infrastructure includes developing portals, enabling web access, expanding available smart classrooms, and developing systems to accelerate response times. This is an area where the College works closely with the District office to acquire and implement new technology. A technology plan was developed to provide a roadmap for developments in this area. Although there have been many developments in the course of the last forty years, only the major changes that took place since the last accreditation visit in 2005 are highlighted here. The changes are discussed in depth throughout this self study.

Administrative Changes Cypress College has witnessed changes in leadership since the last accreditation visit. The leadership transition was smooth, and College planning was uninterrupted with the incoming president in July 2007. The new Executive Vice President has been with the District for over twenty years, serving the last three years at Cypress College. The new Vice President of Administrative Services is a long-term employee of the College, beginning in her current capacity in 2007. Apart from the Presidentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Staff, there have been changes in the divisions as well. A new dean has been appointed in Fine Arts. For the short term, the Language Arts and Library dean positions have been consolidated. Student Services also witnessed its share of change. The process of orienting new management employees was effective while the focus of the College remained on student success. There has not been any change in the present management team for the past two years.

Cypress College

Demographics of Cypress College and the Areas it Serves The Big Picture: Demographic and Employment Trends The primary service area of Cypress College, a part of the North Orange County Community College District, includes the cities of Cypress, Anaheim, Buena Park, Garden Grove, Stanton, La Palma, Los Alamitos (Rossmoor), and Seal Beach. Although nearly half of its students come from cities outside the primary service area, and many come from the adjoining other areas of Orange County, or Los Angeles county, for the purpose of this demographic analysis, only the data for Orange County is taken into consideration. The American Community Survey 3-year estimates project the population of Orange County as 2,985,995. Figure 1 shows the proportion of different ethnicities in Orange County.

Figure 1: Orange County Demographic Estimates: percentages do not add up to 100 because of rounding Data Set: 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates Survey: Census.gov, American Community Survey

One significant change between the 2000 census and 2008 projections is the increase in the Hispanic population. The proportion of Hispanics in Orange County increased from 30.8% in 2000 to 33% in 2008 – a gain of over 2% in eight years. The initial results of the 2010 census show that the Hispanic population is continuing to grow. The demand for a college education has also increased between 2000 and 2008. According to the American Community Survey Estimates (Census.gov) in 2008, 83% of people 25 years and over had at least graduated from high school, and 35% had a bachelor’s degree or higher. This is a significant improvement from 2000 when 79.5% completed high school or higher, and 30.8% received a Bachelor’s degree or higher. The total school enrollment in Orange County was 859,000 in 2008. Nursery school and kindergarten enrollment was 92,000, and elementary or high school enrollment was 519,000. College or graduate school enrollment was 248,000.

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Figure 2: Educational Attainment of People in Orange County: percentage of population 25 years and over Source: Census.gov, American Community Survey, 2006-2008

According to the American Community Survey, 2006-2008 (Figure 2), the two leading industry segments in terms of employment were Educational services (health care and social assistance) and Manufacturing. Educational services, health care, and social assistance employed 17% of the population 16 years and older while Manufacturing employed 14%. Among the most common occupations were: (1) Management, professional, and related occupations; (2) Sales and office occupations; (3) Service occupations; (4) Production, transportation, and material moving occupations; and (5) Construction, extraction, maintenance and repair occupations. Figure 3 shows the proportion of employees in the top five occupations. Eighty-one percent of the people employed were private wage and salary workers; 11 percent were federal, state, or local government workers; and 8 percent were self-employed. The employment data indicates that the largest occupations in Orange County require a postsecondary education. This is similar to the overall trend across California and the United States where a shortage of an educated and skilled workforce is predicted over the next decade.

Figure 3: Top five occupations in Orange County, 2008 Source: Census.gov, American Community Survey, 2006-2008

Cypress College

The need to attain a postsecondary education has increased steadily in the past decade because of changing socio-economic conditions. Projections indicate that by 2012, the majority of jobs, including fastest growing occupations, will require some postsecondary credential. An increased need in occupational “upskilling” will add further to the demand for skilled professionals (Carnevale, 2008). The need for a workforce with a postsecondary education is expected to rise by 2018 as nearly 76 million baby boomers retire. The Accountability Report for Community Colleges (ARCC) shows the relationship between income and academic qualifications. The data show that median income of students receiving a degree/certificate from community colleges grows at a faster pace than the median per capita or household income in California. Over a ten-year period, the median income of students with a community college degree out performs the state household or per capita median income (ARCC, 2010; page 21). The recent economic downturn has added to the increasing demand for postsecondary education. Many adults are unable to find employment in the economic recession and are enrolling in colleges to re-tool their skills. The economic downturn has thus resulted in a higher proportion of non-traditional students turning to postsecondary education. The increasing competition for seats at California State Universities (CSU) and University of California (UC) systems have compelled many of the potential CSU and UC students to come to the community colleges. The recent enrollment trends at Cypress College reflect this sharp increase in demand for courses.

Students at Cypress College

Figure 4: Enrollment Trend – 2003 to 2010

The highest enrollment recorded in the history of Cypress College was during Fall 2009. At the census date, 16,670 students were enrolled, up from 14,990 in Fall 2008. This represents an increase of 11% from Fall 2008 and a 21% change from Fall 2007. This is the highest enrollment ever at Cypress College, improving upon the past record of 16,266 in Spring 2002. The 11% increase is particularly significant because of the reduction of 112 sections — or nearly 6.5% — in class offerings from Fall 2008 levels. Figure 4 shows the enrollment during the last seven years. From 2006, every semester registered a significant increase in enrollment compared to its previous period. Typically, Spring enrollment is significantly less than the Fall figures. However, this trend has changed in the last two years when Spring enrollment has been comparable to Fall figures. This is probably due to a combination of reasons such as economic downturn and reduction in course offerings. In Spring 2010, the enrollment was less by nearly 1,000 (headcount) than the previous Fall because 128 fewer sections were offered. The distribution of students by gender has remained steady over the past decade (Figure 5). Nearly 60% of students are female – this mirrors the national as well as California trend. Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Figure 5: Proportion of students by Gender

Figure 6: Distribution of students by ethnicity

Participation rate by ethnicity during the Fall semester has changed over the past five years. This change reflects the overall change in the population served by Cypress College. As shown in the demographic information in Figure 6, the proportion of Hispanics has increased in Orange County. Following the overall population trend, the Hispanic enrollment at Cypress College has increased steadily over the past five years. For the first time in Fall 2009, Hispanic students were the single largest ethnicity on campus.

Cypress College

Figure 7: Distribution of students by age

Distribution of students by age remained relatively unchanged over time (Figure 7). The largest group on the campus has always been between 20 and 24 years of age; in Spring 2010, the proportion of 20-24 year olds increased to 38%. The proportion of students below 20 years of age has increased steadily since Fall 2006. It is likely that such increases are caused by a number of reasons such as increase in high school graduates, increase in overall population, and limited seat availability at UC and CSU campuses. The enrollment in public schools grades 9-12 in California is projected to grow at 1.4% between 2011 and 2017, coming up from a decline of -1.5% between 2005 and 2011 (Projections of Education Statistics, U.S. Dept. of Education, page 52). In Orange County, the high school dropout rate has increased in 2007-2008, according to Orange County Community Indicators. However, the dropout rate is not uniform across ethnicities â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Hispanic students drop out at a higher proportion than others. The growth in high school enrollment is likely to increase the number of younger students seeking enrollment in colleges. The demographic information, demand for higher education, and high school enrollment growth all point towards a higher level of enrollment. Furthermore, various motivations for college enrollment exist among different age groups: high school graduates are expected to increase the number of students below 20 years of age seeking college admission; and the need to re-skill is expected to increase the number of older adults seeking a college education. Nearly 60% of the students enrolled at Cypress College are part-time. The enrollment pattern has steadily changed between 2001 and 2007. During this period, full-time enrollment almost doubled from 21% to 40%. Since 2007, the enrollment pattern has remained very stable. There has been a significant increase in self-declared objectives of students when the enrollment pattern changed (Figure 8). As more students enrolled full time, the intent to transfer to a four-year institution also increased simultaneously. It is appropriate to infer that the enrollment pattern and self-declared intent are a reflection of overall improvement of academic qualifications of the general population of Orange County. However, after 2007, although the proportion of full-time students became steady, the aspiration to transfer to a four-year institution has still been increasing, albeit at a slower pace.

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

Figure 8: Self-declared intent at the time of enrollment

Student needs have also changed over the past years keeping in pace with the change in enrollment patterns, student demographics, and student aspirations. In Spring 2010, 39% of students were first generation in college, and 63% came from under-represented ethnic groups. Although no separate study was conducted to determine the academic preparation of these students, existing research indicates that both first-generation students and students from under-represented ethnic groups tend to be academically less prepared (AchievingtheDream.org, American Association of Community Colleges). In order to increase their chance of success, Cypress College strengthened its Matriculation services: Assessment, Orientation, and Counseling. The student progress data from the Chancellorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Office (Accountability Report for Community Colleges, 2010) also demonstrates that Cypress College has made reasonable progress in helping students learn. The needs of students vary with the changing demographics and aspirations of the entering student body. An increase in first-generation students and students from minority groups, who tend to be under-prepared, increases demand for basic skills. A larger number of Hispanic students results in increasing demand in ESL courses. The older adults need orientation services and time management tips to integrate into college. The younger students need to transition from high school to college life. The changing student body requires academic as well as student services to ensure that students have the tools they need to succeed in college. The college-wide performance indicators show that Cypress College has been catering to the needs of its students.

Student Performance The Accountability Report for Community Colleges (ARCC) provides a comparative analysis of college performance in several areas. Specifically, progress in English as a Second Language (ESL) data from ARCC 2010 indicates there has been significant progress; Cypress College has been ahead of its peers for three consecutive years in this measure. Also, the College performance has improved in each of the three years. One of the critical needs of the increasing number of Hispanic students is met via a strong ESL program. Cypress Cypress Peer Group Average

2004-05 to 2006-07 59.0%

2005-06 to 2007-08 64.2%

2006-07 to 2008-09 64.9%

43.2%

53.6%

54.8%

Figure 9: ESL Improvement Rate

Cypress College

Another set of ARCC data indicates that basic skills improvement at Cypress College was significantly better than its peer groups. In this measure, the College performance has improved from one year to the other since 20062007. 2004-05 to 2006-07

2005-06 to 2007-08

2006-07 to 2008-09

Cypress

56.5%

58.6%

59.4%

Cypress Peer Group Average

46.6%

52.6%

54.2%

Figure 10: Basic Skills Improvement Rate

Student progress and persistence rate (SPAR) data from ARCC also shows improvement in the past two years. The SPAR data combines measures of degree/certificate completion, transfer to University of California/California State University systems, and vocational/occupational workforce development. An important observation in this area is that Cypress College performance has improved in the last two years as the performance of its peer institutions has gone down. 2001-02 to 2006-07

2002-03 to 2007-08

2003-04 to 2008-09

Cypress

51.6%

50.7%

52.5%

Cypress Peer Group Average

53.4%

47.7%

47.9%

Figure 11: Student Progress and Achievement Rate

Figure 12: Student success under-prepared students.

Student success and retention rates have remained very consistent over the last five years. It should be noted that with increasing enrollment, many first-generation students and students from minorities have come to Cypress College. Existing research shows that these student populations (first generation, ESL, and minorities) tend to be academically under-prepared. From that perspective, maintaining a steady success and retention rate required substantial effort from the faculty and staff at the College. Several college initiatives such as Supplemental Instruction, Peer Assisted Learning, Legacy, University Transfer Achievement Program (UTAP), Puente, Honors, and Tutoring are aimed at helping students.

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

Employee Demographics

Figure 13: Distribution of staff by gender and assignment

Cypress College employs over 850 instructors, managers, and staff. Women comprise about half of the employees across most job assignment categories. In some categories, such as managers, the proportion of males is higher than females. Among the full-time faculty, there are more females than males, although the situation is exactly reversed among the part-time faculty. Overall, the gender distribution has remained fairly stable over the last five years. Table 1 shows the distribution of staff by age. Out of 880 employees, 459 are below and 421 are above 50 years of age. Overall, there is a growing concern across the nation about the ageing workforce in higher education, and Cypress College is no exception since a large proportion of employees at Cypress College are over fifty years of age. Keeping with the area served by the College, the staff is ethnically diverse although Caucasians are the largest ethnicity among all categories of staff. As of the beginning of Fall 2009, the College has higher proportions of managers and full-time faculty approaching retirement than adjunct faculty and classified staff. This is a national trend in higher education. It is expected that as the baby boomers start retiring, there will be a void among the faculty and staff, particularly in the experienced ranks. Although the situation is known to everyone, no specific strategy has been adopted to reduce the impact of such attrition of senior staff. A substantial number of retirements as well as a shortage of a talented workforce pool may adversely impact the College operations. Age Group

Manager

Less than 30

Classified

FT Faculty

PT Faculty

Total

30 - 39

188

40 - 49

106

232

50 - 54

130

55 - 59

144

60 and over

147

215

208

428

880

Total

Table 1: Employee Age by Assignment, Fall 2009

Cypress College

Figure 14: Employees by Ethnicity, Fall 2009

Figure 14 shows the distribution of all employees by ethnicity. Although the majority of employees are White (64%), many other ethnicities are represented among faculty, staff, and administrators at Cypress College; 15% are Hispanic and Asian (including Filipino and Pacific Islander). Compared to 2007, the proportion of White employees decreased (by 3 percentage points) but held steady between 2008 and 2009. Figure 15 shows the ethnicity of employees by assignment. Of the various employee groups, the classified staff remains the most diverse, with nearly fifty percent non-white employees, followed by managers. The least diverse group is the part-time faculty.

Figure 15: Employee Ethnicity by Assignment, Fall 2009

Cypress College regularly evaluates the demographic information of the population of its service areas and its students. The enrollment management strategies take into consideration changes in student needs to provide access to students and help them succeed in college. In the discussion of the four accreditation standards, references are made regularly to the demographic information. Several initiatives that are targeted at specific student populations are also referenced in the discussion of the standards. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning publishes a news bulletin every semester that summarizes student demographics. Also, a detailed demographic analysis is prepared as a part of the annual Institutional Effectiveness Report. In Fall 2009, a Dashboard of InInstitutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

stitutional Effectiveness was prepared. The Dashboard identifies the strategic initiatives of the College and tracks fourteen parameters that represent the Collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s accomplishments in the strategic areas.

Cypress College

Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Student learning outcomes (SLOs) are statements that specify what students will know, be able to do, or be able to demonstrate when they have completed or participated in a program/activity/course/project. Outcomes are usually expressed as knowledge, skills, attitudes, or values. SLOs specify an action by the student that is observable, measurable, and capable of being demonstrated. Apart from being a key component of accreditation, developing and measuring SLOs help to improve teaching and learning at an institution. Several accreditation standards developed by the Accreditation Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) bears reference to SLOs. In ACCJC’s language: Standard I: “The institutional mission provides the impetus for achieving student learning and other goals that the institution endeavors to accomplish. The institution provides the means for students to learn, assesses how well learning is occurring, and strives to improve that learning through ongoing, systematic, and integrated planning.” Standard II: “Instructional programs, student support services, and library and learning support services facilitate the achievement of the institution’s stated student learning outcomes.” Standard III: “Human, physical, technology, and financial resources enable these programs and services to function and improve.” Cypress College started developing SLOs in 2002 and is committed to completing SLO development and measurement for all courses and programs by 2012. SLOs are an integral part of all program review – the program review forms for instruction, student services, and campus support services were modified in 2009 to help establish a connection between SLOs and allocation of resources. The programs are required to document the relationship between funding requests and SLO assessment and analysis. A chronology of SLO development and assessment at Cypress College is provided in the following section. Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Student Learning Outcomes: 20022009 2002-2003: Faculty initiated the SLO discussion in the Fall. Throughout the year, faculty and deans attended regional SLO conferences and workshops to familiarize themselves with SLOs and assessment techniques. Peggy Maki spoke at Fall Opening Day 2003. 2003-2004: The Staff Development Coordinator facilitated a number of meetings to encourage collegewide dialogue on SLOs. The dialogue group drafted a set of institutional learning outcomes (ILOs), which were approved by the Cypress College Academic Senate, adopted by President’s Advisory Cabinet in late Spring 2004, and published in the College Catalog. 2004-2005: To better prepare for the Accreditation Team visit in March 2005, an SLO Team was created. The SLO Team initially consisted of three members: Nancy Deutsch, Staff Development Coordinator; Randy Martinez, Psychology faculty member; and Heather Brown, Director of Institutional Research. With guidance from the SLO Team, faculty worked as departments to complete an ambitious course mapping project. The resulting ILO-Course Matrix was completed by December 2004 and reflects the extent and level to which each course provides opportunities for students to achieve each ILO. 2005-2006: The SLO Trainer was added to the SLO Team to design and implement staff development workshops for faculty and staff to help them learn about SLOs, including how to write measurable student learning outcomes at the course and/or program level and how to develop a plan for assessing SLOs. Betty Disney, Fine Arts faculty member, assumed this new role as SLO Trainer and created a Blackboard training site to conduct faculty workshops. Throughout the spring semester, departments wrote SLOs for at least one individual course. 2006-2007: By Fall 2006, the SLO Faculty Assessment Facilitator was added to design and implement workshops to help faculty in the following areas: (1) selecting or developing appropriate measures to assess the extent to which students achieve stated SLOs and (2) compiling, analyzing, summarizing, and/or interpreting assessment data. Randy Martinez assumed this role and presented workshops throughout the year to assist departments to develop and implement assessment plans for the SLOs they had written the previous spring. In 15

Spring 2007, some departments gathered data for at least one course. A significant milestone for the College was the establishment of an SLO Coordinator position in Spring 2007. Responsibilities of the coordinator include: chairing the SLO Team meetings to develop a cohesive, integrated process for assessing, documenting, and reporting SLOs; tracking and following up on the various SLO stages; ensuring campus-wide communication and discussion of SLOs and their assessment; and writing an annual executive summary of progress. Ben Izadi, faculty member in Computer Information Systems, was selected for this role in Spring 2007. In April and May, the SLO Team prepared comprehensive reports for the Board of Trustees and the Accrediting Commission. The reports showed that all but five departments had developed SLOs for at least one course. The college had identified SLOs for 55 of its 1,060 active courses (5%), and developed assessment plans for 32 active courses (3%). 2007-2008: The year was marked by a significant increase in the breadth and depth of work in this area. The SLO Coordinator and other SLO Team members identified several remaining challenges deterring progress and discussed ways to move forward. During the Fall Opening Day session, the SLO Coordinator briefed the faculty of the current state of the SLO process and invited them to participate in a new set of campus-wide dialogue sessions. In September, six SLO dialogues were attended by 70 faculty members, deans, and other campus leaders. As a result of these sessions, a set of recommendations were established.1 In brief, the recommendations called for an Expanded SLO Committee with representation by every division and established a more ambitious timeline to write SLOs and close the assessment loop. The Expanded SLO Committee with a faculty representative from each division convened and met monthly to hear division status reports, discuss problems and related solutions, plan workshops and activities to meet the goals, and approve important documents and actions. The committee also developed a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document to guide the faculty members in the SLO process. During Fall 2007 and Spring 2008, more than 200 fac1 Recommendations to the Academic Senate from the SLO Dialogues, approved September 27, 2007.

ulty members participated in workshops (SLO Writing, Assessment, Analysis and Report Writing) offered by Randy Martinez. The Spring Opening Day program included a breakout session to allow time for faculty members to work together and post course SLOs and assessment plans. Subsequently, the percentages of courses with SLOs increased from 5% to 39%, and those with assessment plans increased from 3% to 18% by the end of the 2007-2008 academic year. The SLO Committee used a Blackboard site to store SLOs and assessment plans, and an Excel file to track the status of SLOs at the course level. The reports were stored on the campus repository (J: drive). However, with accelerating levels of activity in this area, neither of these tools was adequate. To sustain progress and success in this area, the SLO Committee identified the need for a comprehensive tool that would assist faculty and staff with the development, assessment, and reporting of SLOs at all levels. In Spring, a small taskforce reviewed existing commercial products and considered many important factors. The taskforce invited four vendors to campus for on-site demonstrations, which were well attended by faculty and staff from Cypress College, Fullerton College, the School of Continuing Education, and the District offices. After additional investigation and deliberation by the taskforce, the Expanded SLO Committee approved the selection of a specific assessment management software (TracDat) at its May meeting. 2008-2009: The process of SLO development continued under the leadership of the SLO Team in 20082009. The primary focus was to develop the course SLOs during the year. The development of program learning outcomes (PLOs) for individual programs and the General Education and Basic Skills Program Learning Outcomes (GE & Basic Skills PLOs) that involve multiple divisions was planned for the 20092010 academic year. The goal for 2008-2009 included developing 50% of the course SLOs and closing 25% of the loops. As of Summer 2009, 60% of the course SLOs were posted and 26% of the loops were closed. Although the progress has been satisfactory, there had been some concerns among the faculty regarding the SLO process. One of the concerns was general understanding and workload associated with the SLO process. In order to overcome this problem, the Expanded SLO ComCypress College

mittee members were charged with the task of helping with the development of SLOs in their respective areas. Also, an open forum to discuss issues related to the SLO process was held on April 22, 2009. The forum was attended by over 60 faculty and staff members. The dialogue during the forum and the follow-up sessions helped clarify some of the questions. Specific concerns were raised regarding migrating the SLOs from Blackboard to the newly acquired assessment management software, TracDat, and the workload involved with that process. The College created a TracDat Implementation Team to address the migration and training- related issues. The TracDat Implementation Team worked during Summer 2009 to move the existing SLOs from BlackBoard to TracDat. The team also worked on developing a training program for the faculty. Keeping the commitment to the SLO process, the College funded the summer activity out of one-time funding sources. The TracDat Implementation Team identified General Education SLO development, TracDat faculty training, and closing the course loop as areas to focus on in 2009-2010. One of the important accomplishments in the area of SLO assessment was receiving an award from the RP Group for Best Documentation for SLOs in California. This award was presented to the SLO Core Team by the RP Group during the Student Success Conference in Fall 2009. 2009-2010: The process of developing SLOs continued in 2009-2010. As planned, the pilot TracDat training was conducted with the PE Division; the training materials were fine-tuned based on their feedback, and subsequently, trainings were conducted for all full-time faculty members. The TracDat user training included creation of log-ins and instructions on how to input their course SLOs, assessment plans, assessment results, and action plans, as well as generate TracDat reports. Special emphasis was given to closing the loop. The process of closing the loop involved collecting data, using data to validate if SLOs were achieved according to specific standards, and deciding on future plans based on the observed outcomes. This process generated an engaging and sometimes heated conversation among the faculty on the campus. Faculty from different divisions expressed their reservations to change the SLO assessment process based Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

on the feedback of the SLO Core Team and the SLO Coordinator. Also, it was overwhelming for the SLO Coordinator to single-handedly review all reports and provide feedback. The issue was discussed at length at the Expanded SLO Committee meetings, and, finally, it was brought to the attention of the Academic Senate. After hearing the concerns from all constituents, the Academic Senate decided to appoint an SLO Assessment Committee to review the reports. The SLO Assessment Committee was formed near the end of Spring 2010. Members consisted of the SLO Coordinator, SLO Facilitator, and three faculty members. The committee was charged with providing feedback to respective faculty regarding the SLO assessment results. Faculty members are required to respond to each of the recommendations based on the following 3 options: 1. Accept the recommendation and indicate if the recommendation will be implemented during the current assessment cycle. 2. Accept the recommendation and indicate that it will be implemented in the next assessment cycle. 3. Provide an explanation of why the recommendation does not apply. The recommendations by the SLO Assessment Committee and responses by the faculty members are documented in TracDat to provide future reference. The SLO Core Team worked during Summer 2010 to migrate the remaining SLOs, assessment plans â&#x20AC;&#x201C; also called Campus Assessment Techniques (CATs), and assessment results to TracDat. As of October 2010, faculty members have defined SLOs for 85% of the courses, defined assessment methods for 82%, and closed the loop on 48% of all the courses. During Fall 2009, an open forum was conducted to create a GE SLO Committee. Fourteen faculty members representing different divisions volunteered to participate in the committee. The committee met ten times during Fall 2009 and Spring 2010 and developed GE program learning outcomes (PLOs). A draft of GE PLOs was shared with the Leadership Team in Fall 2009. After several rounds of dialogue among faculty in Spring 2010 to justify the inclusion of Basic Skills with General Education and with input from administrators and classified staff, the GE SLO Committee developed a final draft of the General Education & Basic Skills Program Learning Outcomes (GE & BS PLOs). 17

All divisions reviewed the document before it was approved by the Academic Senate in Spring 2010. The GE & Basic Skills PLOs are included in the 2010-2011 College Catalog. As of the Spring semester of 2010, it is required that student learning outcomes be included on all course syllabi. The SLO Coordinator worked with the program chairs and department coordinators across all disciplines to develop their individual program learning outcomes (PLOs). Several divisions determined that their courses contribute mainly to the basic skills and general education curricula and so adopted the GE & BS PLOs as their program learning outcomes. Other departments (mostly vocational) developed their own PLOs for their specific programs. As of October 10, 2010, 27 out of the 32 programs, including the General Education and Basic Skills Program, have defined their PLOs. The remaining programs are working on developing their PLOs and expect to complete them by Spring 2011. Some programs have defined the assessment methods, and the other programs are working with the SLO team to develop the assessment methods. The 20102011 College Catalog includes the program learning outcomes, where available. Plans to assess the GE & BS PLOs and individual program learning outcomes are being addressed in Fall 2010 and Spring 2011. One of the areas that has not been addressed so far is converting from an integrated paper planning, program review, and SLO process to an electronic one by integrating the program review process in the centralized assessment management software, TracDat. This was one of the goals during 2009-2010 that has not been met. The SLO Core Team intends to initiate this process in Fall 2010 and complete it by the end of Spring 2011. Overall, the College has made considerable progress towards developing SLOs for its courses. Department faculty members continue to develop and revise course SLOs, collect data, close the assessment loops, and use the assessment results and action plans in the program review process to request and justify the need for resources, such as instructional aids, technology, personnel, and facilities. The Planning and Budget Committee reviews each department’s Planning and Program Review information provided with its budget request before allocating resources. The investment in the assessment management software, TracDat, is expected 18

to help the College accomplish its goals of implementing and integrating SLO assessment with planning and program review by 2012. The College is exploring ways to centralize all assessments in TracDat. This should include program reviews for instruction, student services, and campus support services. Ultimately, the goal of the College is to establish a firm relationship between SLO and AUO (Administrative Unit Outcomes) assessment, resource allocation, and self improvement.

Assessment Management Software: TracDat For the selection of assessment management software that best fit the “culture” of the SLO process at Cypress College, a subcommittee consisting of six members conducted a comprehensive selection process during Spring 2008. After preliminary research and communication with other colleges, the subcommittee identified seven potential candidates and had web conferences with each of the seven vendors. The top four candidates were invited for on-campus demonstrations, and faculty members were asked to e-mail their feedback. The subcommittee further evaluated the four candidates and identified TracDat as the top candidate. The subcommittee facilitated a conference call between District IT, Cypress College IT, and TracDat IT specialists to resolve any possible implementation/maintenance/upgrade issues. The Expanded SLO Committee approved the selection of TracDat as the SLO assessment software for Cypress College in their meeting on May 7, 2008. The College invested in TracDat in September 2008. In October 2008, selected members of the Expanded SLO Committee made a one-day visit to Mt. San Antonio College, which had several years’ experience with TracDat configuration and implementation. After the visit, that group realized that TracDat had the potential for storing and reporting different campus processes in addition to SLO assessment. However, once TracDat is configured, it would not be possible to reconfigure it. Planning for configuration of TracDat was, therefore, the major challenge in TracDat implementation. After discussion of this issue, the Expanded SLO Committee recommended to the College that prior to TracDat configuration, an Institutional Effectiveness Plan that mapped the SLO assessment process with the instituCypress College

tion’s mission, vision, and goals must be developed. The main purpose of this software is to house all the SLOs, work as a centralized source for all assessment functions, and generate reports that inform the institution about the status of SLO assessment and improvement of teaching and learning at Cypress College. One of the functional requirements of the software is the existence of an Institutional Effectiveness Plan that maps the SLOs and assessments with the institution’s mission and vision. A taskforce created in December 2008 developed an Institutional Effectiveness Plan that helped prepare a roadmap for configuration of TracDat according to the needs of the College. The plan was developed during Spring 2009, and after a review by various shared governance committees and feedback from the faculty and staff, the plan was approved by the Academic Senate and President’s Advisory Cabinet in May 2009. The initial training for configuration of TracDat was also conducted in late May 2009. During Summer 2009, the SLO Core Team worked on migrating some of the SLOs from different locations onto TracDat. The work during Summer 2009 of the SLO Core Team also included developing TracDat training programs for faculty. The plan was to conduct a few pilot training programs for the faculty in Fall 2009, adjust the training program based on the feedback, and roll out comprehensive training for all divisions in Spring 2010. Also, the new program review format developed as a part of the Institutional Effectiveness Plan was used for the first time in Fall 2009 for instructional Department Planning and Program Review and for Student Support Services Quality Review. During Spring 2010, the campus conducted Campus Support Services Quality Review using the new format. The process of inputting the information and data from the program and departmental reviews into TracDat will be initiated in Fall 2010 and completed by the end of Spring 2011 so that the reports generated can be used for planning and resource allocation purposes.

◊

Continue the process of closing the loop on courses and providing feedback

◊

Develop a plan for assessing GE & BS PLOs and individual program learning outcomes

◊

Migrate all existing SLOs from Blackboard and J: drive to TracDat

◊

Complete configuration of the Program Review Process in TracDat and provide training to department coordinators and instructors

◊

Continue holding campus-wide forums to identify concerns and address them quickly

◊

Provide TracDat support for user management and configuration, and assist faculty in data analysis, uploading information, and generating reports

◊

Provide training for Deans on generating reports using TracDat

◊

Develop and integrate Campus Support Service AUOs in TracDat

◊

Develop and establish a 3-year plan for the SLO assessment cycle

Cypress College recognizes the critical role of SLOs in student learning, assessment, institutional planning, and resource allocation. The College is committed to reaching the level of proficiency in using SLOs for institutional planning and program review by 2012.

Major Goals for 2010-2011 The College has made significant progress towards developing SLOs during 2009-2010. However, much work lies ahead in order to reach the level of proficiency in using SLOs for assessment, planning, and fiscal allocation. Specific goals for 2010-2011 include: Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Program Review Cypress College has been conducting program reviews since 1993. Over the last seventeen years, the scope of the review has been expanded to include new programs and services. The review process itself is evaluated periodically to ensure the process contributes to the ultimate goal of continuous quality improvement. The program review process at Cypress College uses planning documents, student learning outcomes, and other assessment results to evaluate how well the program goals are being met and links the budget allocations with findings of the review. Four major purposes served by the program review process are:

◊

Determine if the program is achieving its intended goals and identify means of improvement

◊

Evaluate if student learning outcomes are being met by the program

◊

Identify the resources necessary for the program to successfully accomplish its goals

◊

Outline a plan to fulfill the program goals if the necessary resources are not immediately available

The programs offered at Cypress College are categorized into four areas for the purpose of review: (a) Instructional programs; (b) Student Services programs; (c) Campus Support Services programs and (d) Special programs. The instructional and Campus Support Services programs are reviewed on a three-year cycle: onethird of the programs are reviewed every year (instructional programs in the Fall and campus support in the Spring). The Student Services programs are reviewed on a four-year cycle, with one-fourth of the programs coming up for review every Fall semester. Academic Year 2010 – 2011 will be for Special Programs review, at which time the review cycle will be determined. Although the purpose of program review is to improve the quality of the programs based on existing data, each of the four areas listed above follow somewhat different review processes. The review process establishes the link among program review, student learning outcomes, administrative unit outcomes, and resource allocation.

Instructional Program Review At Cypress College, the instructional program review process was established as a peer-review process by the Academic Senate in 1993 as Instructional Quality Assessment (IQA) and has occurred annually, except for a short period in the academic year 2003-2004 when the process was under review. Establishment of instructional program review components, processes, and forms resides with the Academic Senate as one of the 10+1 academic and professional matters for which the Academic Senate has primary responsibility, according to the Education Code (Title 5 Section 53200). The re-named Department Planning and Program Review Committee (composed of a faculty chair appointed by the Academic Senate, a faculty representative from each of the ten instructional divisions approved by the Academic Senate, and one dean) periodically evaluates the instructional review process and recommends to the Academic Senate changes to the approval process. The existing review of instructional programs includes the following steps:

Reviewing of internal and external trend data

Evaluating past three years’ action plans and goals

Identifying next three years’ goals and objectives

Identifying new courses that will go through curriculum review

Exploring delivery methods, alternative scheduling, and new courses to be offered in the next three years

Planning for phasing out courses that are no longer offered

Examining accomplishment of student learning outcomes

Identifying courses that are due for curriculum review

Establishing support for developmental education

10. Articulating strategies to meet developmental needs of students

11. Connecting the findings with the Educational Master Plan Cypress College

12. Proposing changes, if any, to the Educational Master Plan based on up-to-date data

13. Establishing budgetary requirements based on the review

The review process is periodically examined and updated. The link between existing plans such as the Educational Master Plan and program goals were already incorporated in the template. In the last round of review conducted in Spring 2009, the role of student learning outcomes was made explicit in the process. Also, identifying resource requirements as a part of the program review process was introduced during revision of the process in Spring 2009. Student Services Program Review The objective of Student Services is to provide noninstructional support to students. Program evaluation has been conducted at Cypress College within the Student Services areas for a number of years in various methods. Some offices created their own student satisfaction surveys based on the State Chancellor’s Office Guidelines. Since Fall 2003, the campus has utilized a commercial instrument (the Noel-Levitz Student Services Inventory) to conduct a formal student satisfaction survey. Spring 2005 was the first occasion to pilot test the Student Services Quality Review (SSQR): the first cycle of services evaluated the Admissions, Assessment, and DSPS offices. The process involved surveying students and using the survey data to prepare the review. The Student Services Quality Review Report includes the same elements for all service areas: department, participating names, tally of student responses and comments, goal, narrative of standards being met or not, long-range plan and objectives, goals related to the Strategic Plan - now Student Services Master Plan and the Educational Master Plan, and budget requests/ timelines. By integrating the SLO and quality review processes, the student services programs are likely to gain a more comprehensive assessment of each program, including how well they are aligning student learning outcomes with the institutional mission and how well they are helping students achieve their educational goals. The template used to review Student Services is reviewed periodically. In Fall 2009, the template was reInstitutional Self Study — Spring 2011

vised and approved by the Student Services Council. The previous template included information on student satisfaction (survey data), changes since the last quality review, narrative, and long-range plans and objectives. Two of the areas not addressed specifically in the previous template were student learning outcomes and a link with budgets. During the review in Fall 2009, these sections were added to the template. The current template has a specific section on achievement of student learning outcomes and identification of resources based on the review. The Student Services Council recommended that all Student Services areas include their SLOs in their SSQR information using the Nichols & Nichols model template (i.e., Mission (column I), Goals/Objectives (column II), Data and Use of Assessment Results (column III, IV, V). Also, the template asks for a plan of action in case the identified resources are not immediately available. Special Programs Quality Review (SPQR) Periodically, changes are made to existing review processes, and new processes are developed when the need arises. Such a need was identified, and in Fall 2007, the College developed a new review process for “special programs” that are not purely instructional or student services programs and which do not fit well within existing program review models. The new process was piloted with nine programs (e.g. Legacy, Honors, Peer Assisted Learning, and Tutoring). Each of these programs, with the exceptions of Study Abroad and Honors, has been funded from one-time resources on a year-to-year basis. When it became evident that the funding could not be continued at the same level as in the past due to State budget deficits, the Quality Review became important information for the Planning and Budget Committee to make funding decisions for the year 2008-2009. Similar to the existing program review processes, the new model includes various types of information, including an assessment of overall program effectiveness by program leaders, numbers of students served, and future goals. The template for review of special services was developed in Spring 2010. Reviews of special programs such as Supplemental Instruction and Tutoring were conducted to determine the role of these programs in student success. The findings were positive. Based on the initial review results, the College wanted to incorporate review processes for all Special Programs in Spring 2010 and use the information to make budget decisions. The reviews could not be con21

ducted prior to budget decisions in Spring 2010. The College is committed to conduct the special program review prior to budget allocations for 2011-2012. Campus Support Services Quality Review (CSSQR) Campus Support Services are evaluated every three years. All programs listed below completed their last quality review in Spring 2010

◊

Academic Computing and Media Services

◊

Bookstore

◊

Bursar’s Office

◊

Campus Safety

◊

Institutional Research and Planning

◊

Maintenance and Operations

◊

Staff Development

◊

Production Center

◊

Public Information

In the CSSQR process, each program was evaluated on a set of core measures (e.g., hours of operation, response time, staff helpfulness, staff knowledge, and overall quality of service). Each program also had the opportunity to develop additional survey items and to assess products or services that are unique to the program. Most of these programs used a web-based survey to collect feedback from campus staff; the Bookstore used a point-of-service survey to capture input from all its clients (predominantly students). After the surveys were analyzed by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning, reports were distributed to the department leaders. They were asked to review the results with others in the service area and to consider how the results compared to the findings of the previous review. Each department completed a quality review report that included a reflection on changes since the last review cycle, major objectives, and plans for the next three to five years.

Summary of the Three Program Review Processes The program review processes are examined periodically to ensure that they contribute to continuous quality improvement. During the review of the process in Spring 2009, it was found that no strong linkage exists between student learning outcomes, administrative unit outcomes, budget allocation, and program review. Thereafter, all the program review templates were revised to bring focus onto SLOs, AUOs, and budget allocation. In its revised form, the program review process not only helps improve student learning but also identifies the areas that need fiscal resources. The review includes an analysis and plan of action if required resources are not immediately available. Cypress College has progressively advanced to the phase of sustainable continuous quality improvement for its program review processes. Apart from reviewing its programs, the College periodically reviews its process and improves upon the existing ones. The overall changes made in Spring 2009 demonstrates the commitment Cypress College has towards program review and linking it with planning, SLOs, and budget allocation.

The form used for CSSQR in Spring 2010 was revised to include a focus on administrative unit outcomes and a link with budget allocation. Although most of the administrative units have not defined their administrative unit outcomes (AUO), all the AUOs will be defined by 2012. 22

Cypress College

Abstract Cypress College has remained committed to its vision of being a premier learning community recognized for supporting student success and enriching society. The postsecondary education scenario has changed rapidly since Cypress College was last accredited in 2005. The College has developed a culture of analyzing the education scenario, planning in advance, sharing its plan among various constituents, and aligning resources to fulfill its plans. This approach has helped accomplish the mission of the College, engage faculty and staff in College activities, and maintain a high level of student satisfaction. As reflected in this self study, the College believes it is in compliance with the requirements of the Accrediting Commission of Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC). The self study provided the College an opportunity to engage its faculty, staff, administration, and students in an open and pervasive dialogue regarding different operational practices and procedures. Active participation of 82 employees in the four accreditation standards is indicative of the level of involvement with the accreditation process. Besides those who researched the processes, collected evidence, interviewed constituents, and wrote sections, there have been several others who participated in the process indirectly. The collective work not only identified multiple areas where the College is meeting its goals but also recognized areas where scope of improvement exists. The teams came up with eight planning agendas to help improve the operations of the College. The planning agendas are expected to serve as roadmaps for the forthcoming years. The self study reflects how the College shaped the dialogue among faculty, staff, students, community, and administration to improve student success. The core values of Cypress College – Excellence, Integrity, Collegiality, and Inclusiveness – have remained the driving force behind the self study. The discussions that took place among the teams were all conducted keeping the core values in mind. This self study truly reflects what is done at the College, and how it is done. The demographic analysis and environment scan establishes the context within which the College operates. It is evident that the College attracts nearly half of its students from areas outside its immediate neighborhood. The ethnic mix of students represents the Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

proportion of the larger population of North Orange County. The campus makes an additional effort to remain welcoming to all, and it is reflected in the opinions collected via the Campus Climate Survey (employees) and Student Satisfaction Survey. There are two processes that are mentioned separately in the introductory chapter. These are Program Review and student learning outcomes. Cypress College is consciously building a culture of inquiry and evidence. The program review process reflects how quantitative and qualitative information are merged to evaluate program effectiveness. The process itself is examined periodically for opportunities for improvement. Currently, the program review process establishes the connection between program outcomes, resource requirements, and budget processes. With the establishment of the link between the resource requirement and budget allocation, the program review process meets all the criteria to be in the phase of sustainable quality improvement. Work on Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) has been in progress at Cypress College since 2002. The College has discussed the need, relevance, and utility of SLOs in several forums during this period. As of Summer 2009, SLOs have been defined for most of the active courses. There have been several engaging dialogues about SLOs for the General Education program. The College has also invested in the assessment management software, TracDat, to keep track of assessments of SLOs. The College is progressing towards completing SLO for all active courses and programs by the year 2012. The vision, mission, and core values of the College are reviewed periodically to ensure that they are adequate to serve the College’s students. In Standard I, the self analysis revealed that while the College is fulfilling the requirement of this standard, there is a scope of improvement. The College will evaluate the effectiveness of its programs and services to determine their impact on success of different student groups. The findings will be used to develop, modify, and/or continue services that best serve the students and improve student equity among diverse student groups. In order to be an effective institution, the College will explore ways to improve information dissemination among various employee groups on campus with the ultimate goal of improving participation, understanding the rationale 23

behind decisions, and expanding opportunities to engage in the decision-making process. Instruction, student services, and learning support services constitute the main activities that directly impact student success. In order to improve these areas, Cypress College is perpetually evaluating the outcomes as well as the processes. As mentioned above, the program review process has been improved continuously at the College, and it encompasses instructional, student services, and campus support services. The self study revealed that the standards are being met in the areas of instruction, student services, and learning support services. There are a few areas that will be addressed in the future planning cycles. Three specific areas identified for further improvement are: (i) integrate the Student Learning Outcomes (SLO) and Administrative Unit Outcomes (AUO) assessment results from Instructional, Student Services, and Campus Support Services to improve student success; (ii) Develop and evaluate a method based on mapping the course SLOs to GE & Basic Skills PLOs to assess the GE outcomes; and (iii) collaborate at Chancellorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cabinet to complete the development and adoption of an appropriate and effective educational program development and educational program discontinuance policy as directed in AP 2510.

ership drives an organization forward. Cypress College, the District office, and the Board of Trustees all work in a cohesive manner to align the goals of the College with the District. The collegial relationship helps focus the attention on student success. The recent surveys conducted at the College indicate that employees and students agree that the College maintains a culture that encourages diversity and promotes participation. The candid dialogues that shaped this self study reflect a vibrant college that is proud of its accomplishments and critical of its shortcomings. Guided by its core values of excellence, integrity, collegiality, and inclusiveness, Cypress College continues to engage its constituencies in an inclusive and open dialogue. The self study reflects that although there is a scope of improvement, Cypress College adds value to its students by providing a safe and welcoming learning environment.

Resources are a critical component of any organization. At Cypress College, special care is taken to ensure that human resources are provided adequate technology and infrastructure to function effectively and efficiently. North Orange County Community College District has always been very prudent in allocating its resources. This is reflected in the fact that even in the recent condition of fiscal deficit, the District has been maintaining its operations without any layoffs and has maintained a contingency fund. The Campus Climate Survey and Student Satisfaction Survey conducted in Fall 2009 reflect the level of satisfaction enjoyed by both employees and students. Recent advances in technology require any postsecondary education to continuously evaluate its needs and invest in technological infrastructure. Cypress College, in collaboration with the District, has been doing it continuously. This is an ongoing process and will continue to remain a priority in the future. Finally, leadership and governance are a critical component of any organization. The vision set by the lead24

Cypress College

ORGANIZATION FOR THE SELF STUDY — 2011 Accreditation Self Study Committees Cherie Dickey (Faculty) — Accreditation Self Study Chair Santanu Bandyopadhyay (Director, Institutional Research and Planning) — Accreditation Liaison Officer

Steering Committee Accreditation Self-Study Chair .........................................................................................Cherie Dickey — Faculty Standard I Chair ..................................................................................................................... Lisa Clark — Faculty Standard II Chair ................................................................................................................ Susan Klein — Faculty Standard III Chair..........................................................................................................Rebecca Gomez — Faculty Standard IV Chair .........................................................................................................Carlos Sandoval — Faculty Cypress College President . ...............................................................................................................Michael Kasler Academic Senate President . ................................................................................................... Pat Ganer — Faculty Academic Senate Past-President......................................................................................Robert Johnson — Faculty Accreditation Liaison Officer............................................................................................. Santanu Bandyopadhyay Executive Vice President . .................................................................................................................... Bob Simpson Vice President . ................................................................................................................................... Karen Cant Student Representative ..................................................................................................................... Danial Shakeri Classified Representative ......................................................................................................................... Rod Lusch

Standard I: Institutional Mission and Effectiveness

Lisa Clark

Chair

Faculty

Career Technical Education

Dean Classified Faculty Dean Adjunct Faculty

Business & CIS EOPS Language Arts Health Science Language Arts

Dean Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Adjunct Faculty Classified Classified

Career Technical Education Career Technical Education Science, Engineering & Math Business & CIS Language Arts Counseling Social Science Institutional Research and Planning Instruction Office

Mission

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Dave Wassenaar Chair Avery Olson Olga Moran John Sciacca Jackie Barretto

Effectiveness

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Steve Donley Chair John Alexander Joel Gober Ben Izadi Sarah Jones Stacey Howard Annik Ramsey Phil Dykstra Donna Landis

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Standard II: Student Learning Programs and Services

Susan Klein

Chair

Faculty

Language Arts

Faculty Adjunct Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Classified Manager

Language Arts Language Arts Science, Engineering & Math Social Science Health Science LLRC Business & CIS Language Arts Business & CIS Institutional Research and Planning EOPS

Dean Dean Director Faculty Faculty Faculty Adjunct Faculty Classified Classified Student

Student Services Counseling DSPS Language Arts Counseling Health Science Physical Education Career Center Financial Aid

Instructional Programs

1. Debra McPherson Chair 2. Jason Witt 3. Sujata Chiplunkar 4. Larry Curiel 5. Beth Piburn 6. Billy Pashaie 7. Jeanne Miller 8. Christie Diep 9. Donna Woo 10. Michelle Oja 11. Gil Contreras

Student Support Services

1. Richard Rams Chair 2. Paul de Dios 3. Kim Bartlett 4. Mary Forman 5. Deidre Porter 6. Marcus Marquardt 7. Long Nguyen 8. Deann Burch 9. Alan Reza 10. Karina Hernandez

Library and Learning Support Services

1. Peggy Austin Chair 2. Regina Rhymes 3. Cindy Shrout 4. Keith Vescial 5. Monica Doman 6. Eldon Young 7. Temperance Dowdle 8. Cindy Ristow 9. Santanu Bandyopadhyay 10. Tony Ignacio

Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Dean Classified Classified Director Student

LLRC Social Science Science, Engineering & Math Language Arts LLRC LLRC/Language Arts Matriculation LLRC Institutional Research and Planning

Cypress College

Standard III: Resources

Rebecca Gomez

Chair

Faculty

Health Science

Dean Faculty Faculty Faculty Classified Classified Classified

Social Science Social Science Language Arts Health Science LLRC Business Office Instruction Office

Director Faculty Faculty Classified Classified Classified

Facilities Career Technical Education Language Arts Maintenance & Operations Facilities Fine Arts

Interim Manager Faculty Faculty Classified Manager Manager Faculty

Academic Computing Science, Engineering & Math Language Arts Academic Computing Health Science Public Information Office Fine Arts

Vice President Exec Director Faculty Classified Manager Dean

Foundation Social Science Business Office Business Office Fine Arts

Human Resources

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Nina DeMarkey Chair Becky Floyd Stuart Rosenberg Rosalie Majid Virginia Derakshanian Michelle Bandak Manya Preston

Physical Resources

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Albert Miranda Chair Carlos Urquidi Barbara Kashi Marcia Jeffredo Betty Germanero Grace Suphamark

Technology Resources

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Mike Kavanaugh Chair Michael Frey Jessica Puma Michael Land Darlene Fishman Marc Posner Paul Paiement

Financial Resources

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Karen Cant Chair Raul Alvarez Parwinder Sidhu Jann Nelson Renie Harter Joyce Carrigan

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Standard IV: Leadership and Governance

Carlos Sandoval

Chair

Faculty

Social Science

Decision-Making Roles and Processes

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Diane Henry Chair Jane Jepson Jeremy Peters Donna Freiss Bev Harrington Richard Fee Ryan Billings

Dean Faculty Faculty Faculty Classified Dean Student

Physical Education Counseling Career Technical Education Language Arts Academic Computing Science, Engineering & Math

Board and Administrative Organization

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Rod Lusch Chair Michael Brydges Pat Humpres Jose Gonzalez Bob Simpson

Classified Facilities Faculty Language Arts Confidential President’s Office Student Executive Vice President

Cypress College

Timeline for Accreditation Self Study Leading Up to Comprehensive Evaluation in Spring 2011 March 2009 The key personnel attend the Self Study Workshop on March 13 at Cypress College.

April 2009 to May 2009 The Self Study Chair is appointed by the President’s Advisory Cabinet (April 16). The Steering Committee members, Standards Chairs, and Committee Chairs are selected by the Self Study Chair and approved by the President’s Advisory Cabinet. The Steering Committee meets to agree upon the general approach of the Self Study. The Steering Committee reviews the institutional effectiveness rubric circulated by the Accrediting Commission for Junior and Community Colleges. Each section of the Accreditation Standard is assigned to a separate committee and a separate committee chair. The Standards Chairs are responsible for the work of several Committees. Campus personnel are invited on Accreditation Committees through a college-wide call for volunteers and through individual solicitations.

Fall 2009 Accreditation Committees finalized. Faculty members on the committees are approved by the Academic Senate. The Accreditation Committees establish schedules, define internal procedures, assign responsibilities, and begin deliberations regarding the Accreditation Standards. The Self Study Chairs and the Accreditation Liaison Officers from Cypress College and Fullerton College develop the District Functional Map.

November 2009 The Self Study Chair and the Accreditation Liaison Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Officers from Cypress College and Fullerton College present the Accreditation Self Study Standards and the process followed by each college to document compliance to the accreditation standards to the Board of Trustees.

January 2010 The Self Study Chair shares the status of and future plans for the Accreditation process at the College’s Spring Opening Day Meeting.

Spring 2010 The Accreditation Committees gather information from the campus and meet with relevant groups for dialogue regarding the Accreditation Standards. The committees review the Student Learning Outcome (SLO) reports to ensure adherence to the Accreditation Standards. The committees begin documenting their findings; the Standards Chairs and the Self Study Chair reviews the documentation to ensure that the documentation covers all requirements of accreditation standards.

March 2010 The Accreditation Committee on Board and Administrative Organization holds a dialogue regarding Accreditation Standards with the Board of Trustees.

May 2010 The Accreditation Committees present their initial draft reports to the Self Study Chair and the Standards Chairs. The chairs meet with the committees, if required, to seek clarification.

June 2010 to August 2010 (Summer 2010) The Institutional Self Study Chair prepares the first draft of the Institutional Self Study.

August 2010 The first draft of the Institutional Self Study distributed to the Standards Chairs, the Steering Committee, the Committee Chairs, and the President of the Col29

lege.

January 2011 to March 2011

The Self Study Chair and the Accreditation Liaison Officer present the draft report to the Board of Trustees on August 10, 2010. The Board to provide feedback by September 3, 2010, to the Self Study Chair.

Finalize preparation for site visit.

The Self Study Chair presents the Self Study at the Opening Day of College for Fall 2010.

March 2011 The site visit by Accreditation Team takes place.

August 2010 to September 2010 The steering committee, the standards and committee chairs and committee members review first draft report, suggest revisions, respond to required clarification. The chair prepares second draft of the Institutional Self Study based on the feedback received.

October 2010 Copies of the second draft of the Institutional Self Study are distributed to the division and other major offices on campus. The draft is also placed on the campus server. Campus community provides feedback using web log forms. The Board receives substantial changes on October 12, 2010, based on feedback provided. College holds a series of open forums where all are invited to meet the representatives from each accreditation committee and share views/comments on the Institutional Self Study.

November 2010 The Self Study Chair finalizes third draft of the Institutional Self Study. The Institutional Self Study is endorsed by the Academic Senate (Nov 11), the California School Employees Association (CSEA), the Associated Students, and approved by the President of the College (Nov 18). The Institutional Self Study is presented to the Board of Trustees for approval on November 23, 2010.

December 2010 Final copy of the Institutional Self Study sent for printing.

January 2011 The Institutional Self-Study sent to Accreditation Commission for Community and Junior Colleges of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges. 30

Cypress College

Cypress College Organizational Structure Effective 2010-2011 President – Mike Kasler Educational Programs & Student Support Services – Bob Simpson, Executive Vice President Administrative Services – Karen Cant, Vice President Institutional Research and Planning – Santanu Bandyopadhyay, Director Foundation & Community Relations – Raul Alvarez, Executive Director Public Information – Marc Posner, Public Information Officer Staff Development – Nancy Deutsch, Coordinator Campus Diversity ______________________________________________________________________ Executive Vice President, Educational Programs & Student Support Services – Bob Simpson Business/CIS and Admissions & Records – Dave Wassenaar, Dean Admissions & Records Registration – Regina Ford, Registrar Advisory Committees Counseling & Student Development – Paul de Dios, Dean Counseling Center Career Center Disabled Students Programs & Services – Kim Bartlett, Director Articulation – Stacey Howard, Articulation Officer International Students Program – Yongmi Han, Manager Matriculation – Kris Nelson, Coordinator Puente Program (Counseling Component) Student Discipline Transfer Center Fine Arts – Joyce Carrigan, Dean Patrons of the Arts Study Abroad Health Science – John Sciacca, Dean Nursing – Darlene Fishman, Director Health Services – Mary Lou Giska, Director Program Accreditation Advisory Committees Language Arts – Eldon Young, Dean Educational Interpreter Program – Dennis Davino, Special Projects Manager Forensics Legacy Program Puente Program (Academic & Instructional Component)

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Library & Learning Resources – Eldon Young, Interim Dean Language Lab/Open Commons Learning Resource Center – [Vacant], Special Project Director Distance Education/Learning Lab Peer Assisted Learning (PAL) Supplemental Instruction (SI) Tutoring Services Science, Engineering & Math – Richard Fee, Dean Learning Communities STEM Grant Weekend College Coordinator Physical Education & Athletics Director – Diane Henry, Dean Petitions Student Activities Graduation Senior Day Social Science – Nina DeMarkey, Dean Honors/Service Learning Teacher Preparation & Paraprofessional Programs – Dennis Davino, Special Projects Manager Student Support Services – Rick Rams, Dean Student Ambassador Program CalWORKS CARE Extended Opportunity Programs & Services – Gilbert Contreras, Manager Financial Aid – Keith Cobb, Director Guardian Scholars Outreach TRAC Career Technical Education and Economic Development – Steve Donley, Dean Distance Education Economic Development Grants Tech Prep Title V VTEA Advisory Committees Enrollment Management Personnel ______________________________________________________________________

Cypress College

Administrative Services – Karen Cant, Vice President Academic Computing – Mike Kavanaugh, Interim Manager, Systems Technology Services Media Services Telecommunications Bookstore – David Okawa, Manager Business and Auxiliary Services Budget & Finance Services – [Vacant], Manager, Campus Accounting Bursar Office – Renie Harter, Manager, Campus Accounting Campus Safety – Shirley Smith, Director Switchboard Facilities Use & Rentals Food Services Grant Support Services Personnel Production Center & Mailroom Swap Meet Physical Plant & Facilities – Albert Miranda, Director Maintenance & Operations – José Recinos, Manager

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Certification of Continued Compliance with Eligibility Requirements As evidenced by this Self Study, Cypress College complies with all eligibility requirements established by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges. There has been one Substantive Change, as defined by the Commission, since the last Self Study in 2005. Distance Education course offerings increased progressively over the last five years. As a result of this significant growth, 50% or more of 18 Associate Degree Programs and 54 certificate programs can now be completed via distance education programs. Also, a number of programs offer 40% of the courses via distance education, and they are approaching a point where 50% of the programs may soon be completed via distance education. A Substantive Change proposal was submitted to the Accrediting Commission on August 12, 2009, seeking approval of such change. The approval was granted on September 17, 2009.

Authority Cypress College is authorized by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges and by the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office to operate as an educational institution and to award degrees. Further authority to grant degrees is provided under the auspices of a locally elected Board of Trustees.

Mission The Cypress College Mission Statement, after being adopted by the campus through its shared governance processes, was approved by the Board of Trustees, most recently in November of 2004. The Mission Statement clearly defines the College as a degree-granting institution that serves the surrounding community and as an institution that offers its programs in a “student-centered learning environment.” The Mission Statement is published in the College catalog, on the College website, in Divisions, and in a variety of other official publications.

Governing Board The North Orange County Community College District Board of Trustees is an independent policy-making body capable of reflecting constituent and public interest in Board activities and decisions. The Board is composed of seven members elected by registered voters in the District; the Trustees represent four specific geographic areas but are elected at-large. Trustees serve four-year terms of office, and the positions are staggered to ensure a degree of stability and continuity. Two Student Trustees, representing the interests of students at Cypress College and Fullerton College, are elected annually by the students at their respective colleges for one-year terms.

Chief Executive Officer The Chief Executive Officer of Cypress College is the College President. The President, appointed by the Board of Trustees, holds a full-time position at the College and has the authority to administer Board policies, manage resources, and ensure compliance with all statutes and regulations. The President does not serve on the Board of Trustees. The Chief Executive Officer of the North Orange County Community College District is the Chancellor, whose full-time position allows him to oversee the management of the three major entities of the District. The Chancellor does not serve on the Board of Trustees.

Administrative Capacity The College President is directly supported by a senior staff that consists of the Executive Vice President, Educational Programs and Student Services; a Vice President, Administrative Services; and a Director, Institutional Research and Planning. The College has ten Division Deans, 9 Directors, and 9 Managers. Support staff is provided for all positions. All administrative personnel meet or exceed the minimum qualifications for their positions in terms of qualifications, training, and experience.

Operational Status In Fall of 2009, Cypress College enrolled 16,533 students. Students are pursuing Associate in Arts and Science degrees, occupational certificates, transfer certification, basic skills development, and lifelong learning Cypress College

opportunities.

Degrees Cypress College offers a variety of degree and certificate programs; all are clearly described in the College catalog. The vast majority of the Collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s courses are applicable to degrees and/or certificates. The College does offer non-degree applicable courses that are intended to assist students in basic skills development. In the 2008-2009 academic year, 1,013 students completed degree requirements, and 760 students completed certificate requirements. Also, 719 students transferred to 4-year institutions during the same period. In Fall 2009, the total number of students (unduplicated) pursuing pre-collegiate credit courses was 3,342.

Educational Programs The principal degree programs at Cypress College are congruent with its Mission to provide Associate in Arts and Science degrees, occupational certificates, and transfer education preparation. All such programs are based on recognized higher education fields of study, are of sufficient content and length, and are conducted at levels of quality and rigor appropriate to the degree offered. All courses and programs must be approved by the Curriculum Committee and the Board of Trustees, and the College requires the completion of at least sixty units for a degree. All approved courses must specify course objectives, means of evaluation, and course content and scope. As of Spring 2010, 79% of the programs have defined program learning outcomes.

Academic Credit Cypress College awards student credit for coursework using the standard established by Title 5, section 55002.5, of the California Code of Regulations. For semester length courses, one unit of credit is awarded for each hour of lecture per week or for three hours of laboratory activities per week.

Student Learning and Achievement All courses at the College must have an approved course outline, which includes the instructional objectives for student learning, the methods of achieving those objectives through assignments and activities, and the means of evaluating the level of achievement. Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

All approved programs at the College must specify the objectives of the program; currently, completion of courses indicates that those objectives have been met. The College also has adopted a specific set of institutional learning outcomes (ILOs) that students receiving degrees, certificates, or transfer certification are expected to have achieved. The College is engaging in a campus-wide dialogue to reach a better understanding of student learning outcomes (SLOs), with the intention of ensuring their clearly identifiable inclusion in all courses and programs. As of October 2010, faculty members have defined SLOs for 85% of the courses, defined assessment methods for 82%, and closed the loop on 48% of all the courses. It should be noted that 100% of courses will not have SLOs. Although the catalog lists all courses, only those courses that are being offered currently are defining course SLOs.

General Education All degree programs at Cypress College must contain a substantial component of general education courses that are designed to ensure breadth of knowledge and promote intellectual inquiry. Of the sixty units required for an Associateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s degree, twenty-five of those units must be from the approved general education list. Students are required to complete courses in language and rationality, the natural sciences and mathematics, art and humanities, the social sciences, and physical activities and health. Students must also complete a course in cultural diversity and demonstrate proficiency in reading. All such courses, as a result of the curriculum review process, are consistent with the levels of quality and rigor appropriate to higher education. A committee worked during Fall 2009 to develop General Education & Basic Skills Program Learning Outcomes; the Academic Senate approved the GE & Basic Skills PLOs, and these are published in the 2010-2011 College Catalog.

Academic Freedom The North Orange County Community College District adopted a board policy and administrative procedure of Academic Freedom (BP/AP 4030) in February 2008. In addition, the College has a Statement of Professional Ethics that commits the College to the belief that faculty and students are free to examine and test all knowledge appropriate to their discipline or area of 35

major study as judged by the academic/educational community in general. The College maintains an atmosphere in which intellectual freedom and independence exist.

Faculty In the Fall semester of 2010, Cypress College employed 212 full-time faculty and approximately 390 adjunct faculty. Approximately sixty-six percent of the College’s credit hours are taught by full-time faculty. All faculty meet or exceed state-mandated minimum qualifications. The roles and responsibilities of faculty members are delineated in the collective bargaining agreements the District has signed with United Faculty and Adjunct Faculty United - the unions for the fulltime and adjunct faculty. Those responsibilities include the development and review of curriculum and the assessment of learning. A Faculty Handbook that was last revised in 2004 is currently being updated.

Student Services Cypress College offers a wide range and variety of services to assist students in meeting their learning and developmental needs. The services are comprehensive and accessible to all students. Services are listed in the College Catalog, the Schedule of Classes, the Student Handbook, and on the College website. In addition, all faculty are asked to refer to those services on their syllabi. Students are also made aware of the available services during Orientation.

Admissions Consistent with its own Mission, the mission of the California Community Colleges, and Title 5 of the California Education Code, Cypress College maintains an open admissions policy. Eligibility to enroll at Cypress College is open to all high school graduates, all those who possess a G.E.D. certificate, all those who possess a California High School Proficiency Certificate, or those eighteen years of age or older who can profit from instruction, all those under eighteen years of age who can profit from instruction and who have a recommendation from his or her parent and high school principal, or any person under eighteen years of age not enrolled in school who can profit from instruction and has a recommendation from his or her parent and/or guardian. 36

Information and Learning Resources The College provides sufficient information and learning resources to support its Mission and instructional programs. The College Library is the primary repository of books, periodicals, and electronic databases. In addition, a number of other learning centers can be found throughout the campus, providing either specialized services or campus-wide services. Computer access is provided in a number of the different centers. The College’s new Library/Learning Resource Center provides for both the expansion and consolidation of information and learning resources. The College periodically reviews student needs and aligns its resources to serve students.

Financial Resources The North Orange County Community College District and Cypress College have a funding base that is adequate for the College’s student learning programs and services, its efforts to improve institutional effectiveness, and its ability to maintain financial stability. The District reserve exceeds state-mandated minimum requirements. However, while the funding base is adequate, the severe cuts in state funding that have occurred in the last few years have resulted in the reductions of staffing, course offerings, and student services. The District and the College have worked together to maintain instruction and student services despite ongoing budget cuts.

Financial Accountability The North Orange County Community College District is audited annually by an independent audit firm to ensure that it is in compliance with all regulations of the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office and the United States Department of Education. The reports are reviewed annually by the Board of Trustees, and the District responds to any exceptions or findings. Similar processes are in place at the College level with college-wide budgets and special budgets being audited annually by independent firms. The College responds to any exceptions or findings. Neither the District nor the College has shown an annual or cumulative deficit in its budgets.

Cypress College

Institutional Planning and Evaluation Cypress College gives serious attention to institutional planning and evaluation (e.g., Educational Master Plan, Technology Plan). The College’s Strategic Plan is the primary document the campus relies upon for its integrated planning processes, resource allocation, implementation, and re-evaluation. In addition to the college-wide process, specific areas undergo planning and evaluation through their own review processes. Chief among those are the Departmental Planning and Program Review, the Student Services Quality Review, and the Campus Support Services Quality Review processes. All are designed to allow the specific areas to evaluate the current state of their programs and to plan for the future. Those results are then integrated with the campus-wide Strategic Plan. All such reviews and plans are public and available to any who wish to examine them. Also, the College publishes an Institutional Effectiveness Report every Fall. This report is a compendium of the initiatives that the College takes to plan and evaluate its services. Beginning Fall 2009, the College introduced a Dashboard of Institutional Effectiveness. Fourteen parameters reported in the Dashboard provides a summary of the College’s initiatives and results in the five areas identified in the Strategic Plan.

also be found on the College website and in the Schedule of Classes.

Relations with the Accrediting Commission Cypress College has consistently adhered to the eligibility requirements, standards, and policies of the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges. It describes itself in identical terms to all accrediting agencies, communicates any changes in its accredited status, and agrees to disclose information required by the Commission. The College is in full compliance with the Commission’s requests, directives, decisions, and policies. All disclosures by the College are complete, accurate, and honest.

Public Information The Cypress College catalog is available both in print and online. The catalog is reviewed annually for accuracy and currency. All information requested by the Commission is found in the catalog. Specific information is found in the following areas: 1) General Information – official name, address, telephone and website address of the College; the College Mission Statement; course, program, and degree offerings; academic calendar and program length; available student financial aid; available learning resources; names and degrees of administrators and faculty; and names of the Board of Trustees members; 2) Requirements – admissions, student fees and other obligations, degrees, certificates, graduation, and transfer; 3) Major policies affecting students – academic regulations including academic honesty, academic freedom, nondiscrimination, acceptance of transfer credits, grievance and complaint procedures, sexual harassment, refund of fees, locations or publications where other policies may be found. Abridged versions of the information requested can Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Response to the Previous Team Recommendations, 2005 #1 Budget Allocation Model The team recommends that the District Chancellor develop and implement an evaluation of the existing budget allocation model and make adjustments if appropriate to meet the needs of the entire district (Standard III.D, IV.B.3.c). From 2004-2006, a District shared-governance committee met to revue and evaluate its budget allocation model. The review resulted in significant changes in two allocations and stronger strategic connections between budget priorities and program priorities. Specific results related to operational funding for growth now include providing the campuses with increases in supply and operation costs as the District is funded for growth. A Budget Allocation Committee was formed to continue looking at new budget allocation methods. In addition, the District’s first District-wide Strategic Plan will be used to guide budget decisions.

#2 Strategic Plan The team recommends that the Board of Trustees and Chancellor implement a process to systematically develop and document strategic institutional goals for the district. The goals should: provide a framework for the Colleges’ strategic planning processes; include a review of the district mission statement to ensure that the district strategic goals align with the mission; and be reflected in the allocation of district resources (I.A.I, I.B.4, and III.D.1). During 2005-2006, work began on the District Strategic Plan under direction of the Board of Trustees and the Chancellor. Under the guidance of the College’s planning consultants, the first phase included groups conducting interviews and surveys of students, employees, community members, and others. Eight goals and many potential strategies and indicators/measures were identified around three focus areas: Innovation and Relevancy for All Learners, Intra-District and Community Collaboration, and Effective and Efficient Use of Resources. The second phase, initiated in 2006, 38

worked toward integrating the results of the District planning process with existing campus plans in order to create a more cohesive District-wide Strategic Plan. Additionally, the District is currently working on a Comprehensive Education and Facilities Master Plan, with completion expected 2010-2011.

#3 Strengthen Dialogue

♦ Student Learning and Institutional Effectiveness The College must develop and implement a collaborative, inclusive process that focuses on the continuous improvement of student learning and institutional effectiveness (Standard IB.1) The College has developed an organizational framework with representatives from each instructional program to guide and support the inclusion of learning outcomes for every course offered. Workshops on SLO development and assessment are ongoing. Specific activities for 2007-2008 have included college-wide dialogues held by the SLO Team to determine how to move the SLO-CATs process along faster. The College established a timeline for completing the SLO assessment process for all courses, each division appointed at least one SLO representative to an expanded SLO Team, and each department created a plan for meeting the 2011 College goals. In Fall 2007, the SLO Team was expanded to include faculty representatives from every division, who are charged with communicating important information and new developments to their divisions. In September 2009, a forum was scheduled to discuss the development of General Education SLOs. Faculty volunteered to serve on a General Education Ad Hoc Committee by divisional representation. By May 2010, the General Education & Basic Skills Program Learning Outcomes were developed, presented to the College community for discussion, and approved by the Academic Senate. In May 2010, the SLO Assessment Committee was approved by the Academic Senate as one of its subcommittees to review course SLOs and program learning outcomes assessment and make recommendations for improvement. The College has employed various strategies to strengthen dialogue about institutional effectiveness. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning established a website to provide faculty, staff, students, Cypress College

and members of the public with access to reports and information. Key research reports are distributed and discussed at College meetings and events. A new Institutional Effectiveness Report was developed in 2005 and is published and distributed each Fall and is also available online from the Institutional Research website. In Fall 2009, a Dashboard of Institutional Effectiveness was prepared. The Dashboard (also available online) identifies the strategic initiatives of the College and tracks fourteen parameters that represent the College’s accomplishments in the strategic areas. Also, the College’s Educational Master Plan 2006-2016 and Student Services Master Plan 2007-2014 reflect collaborative, inclusive processes that identify institutional strengths and challenges and culminate in plans to further strengthen institutional effectiveness. In Spring 2009, in preparation for the configuration of TracDat, the assessment management software purchased by the College, the Institutional Effectiveness Task Force was formed to review all college planning, program review, and SLO assessment processes. The Institutional Effectiveness Plan was approved by the Academic Senate and the President’s Advisory Cabinet in May 2009. This document guided the revision of instructional, student services, campus support services, and special programs program review processes that were put into place in 2009 - 2010. The College also has well-established processes for program review in instruction, student services, and campus services, which contribute to ongoing discussions regarding institutional effectiveness. College leaders have been responsive to feedback regarding the relationship between program review procedures and timelines, and closely related initiatives, such as strategic and master planning. The Academic Senate approved a streamlined educational program review process for Fall 2007 that includes clear connections to the Educational Master Plan. In Spring 2009, instructional Department Planning and Program Review (formerly IQA) was revised and approved by the Academic Senate to emphasize the dynamic relationship between course and program SLO assessment and future planning, including the budgeting process. In Spring 2007,the College also began piloting a new review process for “special programs” that are not purely instructional or student service programs. In Spring 2010, the review process for these “special programs” Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

was revised to be consistent with other college program review processes. For Campus Support Services and Student Services, the benchmark was changed to a comparison of their prior review’s levels, and a section on SLO completion was added. The review is linked with budget allocations through the Planning and Budget Committee and in the actual report that requests information about budget requests. The pilot program is still being worked on. ♦ Qualitative and Quantitative Data in Decision-Making Processes Incorporates both quantitative and qualitative information in decision-making (Standard IB.2) Cypress College uses data to inform a wide range of decision-making processes. Decisions about allocations of one-time funds are shaped by qualitative and quantitative data provided to each member of the Planning and Budget Committee and to each member of the Direction Committees. Beginning in Spring 2007, new criteria were included to identify how strongly the funding being requested supported the newly adopted Educational Master Plan. Decisions for on-going needs such as staff vacancies rely on a Classified Staff Needs Assessment to help gauge the importance of refilling a vacated classified position. Decisions regarding faculty positions include careful consideration of a broad range of qualitative and quantitative information before prioritizing the positions to be filled. Starting in October 2007, the Academic Senate president and two additional members of the Senate Executive Committee joined the deans and Executive Vice President in this decision-making process. Data from the Office of Institutional Research and Planning and various other sources inform decisions for allocating other resources such as facilities, course offerings, room utilization, and unmet student demand for courses. This is particularly true while the College faces budget cuts and is forced to cut sections. Data as to who the cuts affect are the foundation for these decisions. ♦ College Mission, Practices, and DecisionMaking Processes Mentors all faculty and staff in the College mission, practices, and decision-making processes (Standard I11A.7; I11A.3) 39

The College has included its Mission and Vision statements in the College catalog, the Educational Master Plan, and the Student Services Master Plan. The inclusion of these statements on the College website has recently taken place. The President has also begun review of the Vision, Mission, and Core Values with new management and classified staff. Communication has been strengthened by a more visible presence of relevant information through the Public Information Office and through the use of “allusers” email in order to inform the entire campus community on important topics. The College has increased opportunities for faculty to effectively participate in the development, shaping and approval of College policy through an increase in available reassigned time. In addition, a task force developed in Fall 2006 recommended significant increases in reassigned time available to department coordinators. Changes in decision-making processes include implementation in Fall 2007 of the inclusion of three Academic Senate representatives as members of the Joint Committee on Full-Time Faculty Positions to consider and prioritize requests from the instructional programs for full-time faculty positions. The College’s commitment to inclusiveness is evident in the shared-governance committees which include membership from administration, faculty, classified staff, and students; specifically, Diversity Committee, Matriculation Advisory, Planning and Budget, President’s Advisory Cabinet, Staff Development, Student Equity Planning, Basic Skills, Enrollment Management, and Campus Technology. ♦ Clear and Effective Communication Path Provides a clear and effective communication path for faculty and staff so they know how to advance needs that maintain and/or enhance students’ learning environment (Standards I11C;I11D; IVA) In order to assure that the campus constituencies stay informed regarding discussions and decision-making taking place in shared-governance meetings, it was decided that each committee conduct an orientation at the beginning of the year. Included in this orientation would be a focus upon the responsibility of constituent representatives to speak up during committee discussions and to share information in a timely manner with the groups they represent. A weekly newsletter from 40

the President’s office is distributed electronically to all campus users and is available through the College website. Also, all shared governance committee agendas and minutes are posted to the campus J:\ drive (campus server) for all faculty and staff to be able to access.

#4 Educational Master Plan The team recommends that the College immediately address the need to develop and implement a comprehensive planning process. In doing so, the College must rely on the College mission and vision to develop a long-term educational master plan to guide short-term and long-term decision-making including resource allocations. This master plan must be developed collaboratively by College personnel and used as the foundational document for all other components of a comprehensive planning process, such as annual operational plans, technology plans, and facilities plans. All components of this comprehensive planning process must incorporate standardized data, contain measurable outcomes, and be widely disseminated. Once the comprehensive planning process is implemented, the process must be periodically evaluated to facilitate a cycle of continued improvement (Standards IA.4, IB., IIA.2f, IIB.4, IIC.2, IIIA.6, IIIB., IIIC.2, IIID.1a, IIID.3, IVB.2b, Eligibility Requirement 19). The Educational Master Plan (EMP) adopted by the College in September 2006 is now the foundational document for College planning. Utilizing cyclical planning processes, the College evaluates curriculum instructional quality and overall institutional effectiveness using the EMP as a guide. The College established a multiyear calendar of major planning activities that is anchored by the six-year accreditation cycle. To capitalize on the work and vision set forth in the EMP, the College engaged in various strategies to weave the EMP into strategic planning, decision making, and resource allocation processes. Additional relevant developments include a new Student Services Master Plan (2007-2014) and Technology Plan developed in 2008.

Cypress College

#5 Evaluate, plan, and improve: Technology The team recommends that the College rely on the educational master plan described in Recommendation #4 to collaboratively develop a comprehensive technology plan that addresses all components of technology resources identified in Standards IIIC.1 and IIIC.2: Academic computing needs, Administrative computing needs, Training for faculty and staff, Equipment maintenance, and Equipment replacement. In October 2007, the Academic Computing staff presented a draft Technology Plan to the Campus Technology Committee (CTC) to begin a process of review, comment, and feedback. The primary objective was to synchronize the Technology Plan with the Educational Master Plan by looking five years into the future at the campus technology needs. Specific issues are Academic and Administrative Computing Needs, Training for Faculty and Staff, and Equipment Maintenance and Replacement. The Technology Plan was reviewed by the College’s constituency groups, including the Academic Senate, in August 2008, revisions approved by the Campus Technology Committee on November 11, 2008, and approved by the Planning and Budget Committee and President’s Advisory Cabinet on November 20, 2008.

#6 Identify and assess student learning outcomes across the campus The College needs to implement and expand its strategic plan related to student learning outcomes. These outcomes must be developed and assessed for

The campus has used an inclusive, faculty-led dialogue process to explore and consider various approaches and select the most appropriate approach for the campus. The dialogue group decided to start by establishing learning outcomes at the institution level and draft a set of institutional learning outcomes (ILOs). An SLO Team was created that initially consisted of three members: the Staff Development Coordinator, a Psychology Department faculty member, and the Director of Institutional Research. In 2005-2006, the SLO Team expanded to include a new SLO Trainer position with responsibilities to design and implement staff development workshops for faculty and staff to help them learn about SLOs, including how to write measurable student learning outcomes at the course and/ or program level and how to develop a plan for assessing SLOs. By Fall 2006, the SLO Faculty Assessment Facilitator position was added to design and implement workshops to help faculty, managers, and classified staff. A significant milestone for the College was the establishment of a Faculty SLO Coordinator position in Spring 2007. Once faculty members in so many departments had developed skills in determining and assessing SLOs, there was the potential to apply them readily to other courses. As of October 2010, faculty members have defined SLOs for 85% of the courses, defined assessment methods for 82%, and closed the loop on 48% of all the courses.

Instructional Programs: Recent Progress and Plans for the Future The SLO Team held a series of college-wide dialogues in September 2007 to determine how to move the SLO-CATs process along faster. Each division was represented by at least one instructor with representatives of individual departments also attending. The specific timeline established through the dialogues and approved by the Academic Senate is as follows: Year

Write SLOs

Complete the loop

Instructional programs at the course, program, degree and certificate levels (Standard IIA.2a, IIA.2e, IIA.2f, IIA.2i, Eligibility Requirements 10, 11),

2007-2008 25% of courses 10%

Student services provided throughout students’ matriculation at the College, (Standard IIB), and Campus support services (Standard IIC.2, IIIB, and IIC.a).

2010-2011 100% of courses 50%

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

2008-2009 50% of courses 25% 2009-2010 75% of courses 37% It is important to note that the 2007 timeline was developed before the College was informed by ACCJC of 41

the Spring 2012 deadline for achieving the proficiency level for SLO process. Since then the SLO committee has communicated to the faculty the need to expedite the process. Another important development to grow out of the Fall 2007 dialogue was the establishment of an Expanded SLO Team with representatives from each division meeting regularly each semester to monitor division and College progress and address emerging challenges. The Expanded SLO Team explored ways to improve campus-wide communication about SLOs and reviewed and evaluated various commercial software packages and other tools that are designed to alleviate the cumbersome task of tracking progress on SLOs. In Fall 2008, after a careful review, the College selected and purchased TracDat as the assessment management software for housing course SLOs and program learning outcomes, assessment plans and reports, instructional departmental plans and reviews, and other College quality reviews. Configuration of TracDat occurred in Spring and Fall of 2009. Training faculty to input course SLO data into TracDat occurred in Spring 2010. In Spring 2011, the College will be providing training on how to assess and enter data for individual program learning outcomes and GE & Basic Skills PLOs developed in Spring 2010. As faculty and program managers review program and course SLO assessment results on a regular cycle, they will be able to update the results of continuing SLO assessment and program review on TracDat and write new plans for improvement.

Student Services In November 2006, the Student Services Council adopted the Nichols and Nichols Model for the development of Student Services Student Learning Outcomes through assessment of conditions that enhance education effectiveness (known on campus as the “five column model”). By May 2007, all 18 student services programs had established SLOs and assessment plans under the facilitation of the Dean of Student Support Services. Early in Fall 2007, each program had completed all five columns for the 2006-2007 SLO cycle. Like their colleagues in instruction, student services staff are still developing the knowledge and skills needed to establish meaningful SLOs, assess them, and close the loop. They have dedicated Student Services Council meetings as workshops to help in these areas. 42

In Fall 2009, SLO assessment was integrated into the College’s quality review process for Student Services, and in Fall 2009, Student Services program SLO assessment results were entered into TracDat.

Campus Support Services The College distinguishes campus services from instructional and student service programs based upon function and the areas served. Specifically, there are nine campus services: Academic Computing, Bookstore, Bursar’s Office, Institutional Research, Maintenance and Operations, Staff Development, Production Center, and Public Information. The College has an established process and cycle of program review for campus support services with clear links to planning and budgeting. One part of the process includes surveying client satisfaction. The most recent Student Services Quality Review (SSQR) used a College standard of 75% of survey respondents saying they were satisfied or very satisfied with different areas of service. As almost all programs had more than 75% of respondents satisfied with their service, a higher benchmark was discussed. This may be implemented in the next Student Services Quality Review cycle. This discussion did lead to a change in the Campus Support Services Quality Review (CSSQR) template in which these satisfaction ratings were compared to the satisfaction ratings from the prior CSS program review cycle rather than a standard benchmark. Managers and staff in each of the areas review the results and complete a quality review report. Summaries of these reports are included in the annual Institutional Effectiveness Report so that others on campus may see and understand the current goals of campus service programs. Campus services are on a three-year cycle and were reviewed again in Spring 2010. The College will be integrating administrative learning outcomes (AUOs) into the existing program review process for campus services in Fall 2010.

Cypress College

Response to CollegeIdentified Planning Agenda Items Mission 1. The Mission Statement will be communicated more clearly to the entire campus community. 2. The College’s Mission Statement will be included in the Curriculum Committee Handbook and Course Development section to provide guidance for those offering curricular revisions. The College has included its Mission and Vision statements in the College catalog, the Educational Master Plan, and the Student Services Master Plan. The College Mission Statement is also included on the homepage of CurricUNET — the College’s curriculum development software — to provide guidelines for those offering curricular revisions. The President has also initiated review of the Vision, Mission, and Core Values with new management and classified staff during their orientation process. Communication has been strengthened through the use of “allusers” email in order to inform the entire campus community on important topics.

Institutional Effectiveness 1. The College will increase efforts to engage a greater number and broader spectrum of participants in the dialogue process. Participants will be encouraged to more effectively serve as conduits of information to their constituency groups. The agendas and minutes from the campus shared governance committees as well as District Planning Council and Board of Trustees meetings are posted to the College’s J:drive. At the beginning of each year, committee chairs review the responsibilities each member has to communicate with the constituency group he or she represents. The College works to promote broad campus participation in campus initiatives via “allusers” emails, campus presentations, and committee members serving as conduits of information to their constituency groups. Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

2. The College will strengthen the linkages of planning activities to all relevant committees, constituencies, Departments, Divisions and services. The College will develop a means of ensuring greater participant rotation on the Direction Committees under the Strategic Plan in order assure greater involvement of the entire campus community. Planning is a regular agenda item for the Planning and Budget Committee (PBC) and for President’s Advisory Cabinet. Each year, the chair of PBC offers to attend division meetings to answer questions. Planning has been re-organized into the Institutional Research and Planning Office, which has resulted in more attention on evidence-based decision making. Increasing Direction Committee rotation has been difficult. Interest and response from potential new participants has not been significant. However, representation includes a cross section of all constituency groups, and Direction 1 now allows for balanced representation from all instructional divisions. 3. The College will communicate to all constituencies’ student success data along with an explanation of how it is collected and how it might be used. During that process, faculty will be assured that any negative data on student success and/or retention relating to their courses does not pose a threat to them individually but will be used as an opportunity for growth and improvement. The Director of Institutional Research and Planning worked with the faculty chair of the Program Review Committee (formerly IQA) and the Staff Development Coordinator to develop and deliver training workshops for faculty regarding a revised instructional program review process that included additional measures of program efficacy such as trends in success and retention rates, enrollment, FTES, efficiency, and awards at the course and department level. The Director of Institutional Research and Planning explained that the purpose of cyclical program review is to help gauge overall program and institutional effectiveness, and that this review must include quantitative and qualitative measures considered within an appropriate context. 4. The College will develop better mechanisms for the distribution of statistical data and reports from the Office of Institutional Research 43

to reach a broader audience within the campus community. Such a process should include the improved sharing of research data and reports among committees and various constituencies. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning established an office website to provide faculty, staff, students, and members of the public easy access to relevant reports and information. The office prepares and distributes an Institutional Research Bulletin each semester, which is distributed to the College via “allusers” email, and a comprehensive Institutional Effectiveness Report is now published and distributed widely each Fall to the campus Leadership Team (approximately 60 members of faculty, classified staff, and managers) and is also available online from the Institutional Research website. In the years that Institutional Research conducts the Campus Climate Survey and the Student Satisfaction Survey, they also bring the reports to several committees and post them on the website. 5. The College will improve the dissemination of research to the surrounding community. Such information will make greater usage of the College’s “success” statistics and data. Since 2005, the College’s Public Information Office has made an effort at broader dissemination of research featuring the College’s success statistics and data. The @Cypress newsletter is published weekly during the Fall and Spring semesters and features information on various areas of success across campus. It is also a primary communication vehicle between the College and the media and is utilized to share campus information with members of various boards and committees, both within the District and throughout the community. Annually, the President of Cypress College presents the End of the Year Report and the Institutional Effectiveness Report to the Board of Trustees.

Instructional Programs The College will continue its focus on the understanding and development of Institutional Learning Outcomes and Student Learning Outcomes and delineate the relationship between the two. The College will develop and assess Student Learning Outcomes for all courses and programs. The College will convey the importance of Student Learning Outcomes to 44

all staff. By May 2004, the College had established institutional learning outcomes (ILOs), and faculty had completed an intensive ILO-course mapping project. As much of the literature and regional discussions centered on the concept of Student Learning Outcomes rather than ILOs, many questions remained among faculty regarding the distinction between the two terms, how to assess them, and how to use them for improvement. The original SLO Team first established following the last accreditation site visit has since expanded to include an SLO Trainer, now known as the SLO Faculty Assessment Facilitator, and the SLO Coordinator. These efforts have provided broader participation among the faculty, the establishment of SLOs, the resolve of the Academic Senate to accelerate the pace by which new SLOs are established and assessed, and new communication tools related to SLOs. As a result of these efforts, the GE & Basic Skills PLOs were established in accordance with the College ILOs in the Spring of 2010 by a committee represented by all instructional divisions. The SLO Team is currently developing plans to assess the GE & Basic Skills PLOs based on course-level SLO assessments which will involve pilot projects and further faculty collaborations. The campus continues to communicate the importance of SLOs through meetings and dialogues. An Expanded SLO Team, with faculty representatives from every division, is also exploring ways to improve campus-wide communication. 1. The College will increase its offerings of Staff Development programs designed to enhance student learning. Since Spring 2004, the Staff Development Office has increased the number of workshops, seminars, and semester-length programs designed to facilitate the use of delivery modes and teaching methodologies that reflect the diverse needs and learning styles of its students. The Staff Development Office has continued to offer a Learning Centered Instruction Workshop Series as part of the New Faculty Seminar including learning and teaching styles, learning strategies and brainbased research, and working with learning disabled students. The Hybrid/Online Training Program was offered one Spring and every Fall from Spring 2004 through Fall 2007 (the end of the 2003 - 2008 Title V Grant). Since the last self-study, the College has had Cypress College

two Opening Day speakers, one who presented multiple workshops on improving student learning using recent brain research and another who gave a keynote address on generational differences of both students and staff. The Staff Development Office has offered four additional semester-long faculty development programs to provide intensive training in creating learning communities and using technology to enhance instruction: Learning Community Development Program, Instructional Web Training Program, TechCafe, and Student Learning Outcomes/College Assessment Techniques workshops. Workshops on using the myGateway Course Studio allowed faculty to put instructional materials online and to create online student dialogues. In Spring 2010, workshops on inputting course SLOs, assessment plans and results, and creating plans for improvement in TracDat were offered. 2. The College will continue its efforts to both track and improve its measurements of student success. Specifically, the College will examine methods to track the employment rates of graduated students and will work to improve its transfer rates, to increase the number of degrees and certificates awarded and to raise its success rates in Basic Skills courses. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning has helped to expand and improve the set of core measurements of student success by identifying and monitoring additional measures of student success and institutional effectiveness. A key tool for reporting and monitoring how well Cypress College is fulfilling its mission is the Institutional Effectiveness Report (IER). Cypress College awards associate degrees in approximately 30 areas. Most degrees are earned in Liberal Arts and General Studies and certificates in 25 areas. Most students who transfer from Cypress College to a CSU or UC campus choose to remain within the greater metropolitan Los Angeles area with the vast majority transferring to a CSU campus; and approximately 80% of the Collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s students who transfer to CSU attend either CSU Fullerton or Long Beach. The numbers of students who transferred to the University of California have remained stable over time. Most of these students transfer to UC Irvine or UCLA. Tracking employment rates for all graduate students has turned out to be an unrealistic and unfeasible goal. The available data are fragmented and fraught with Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

missing cases and important omissions (e.g., students who are self-employed and those who join military service). They also do not provide sufficient information to allow researchers to discern whether the student is employed in the same field studied at Cypress College. However, the College has developed the means to track and survey students in the Mortuary Science and Health Information Technology Programs about their employment after college. With respect to improvement in success rates of students enrolled in basic skills courses, the College has engaged in a number of efforts. Statistics regarding success rates in basic skills courses and student progress through basic skills course sequences are published and reviewed on a regular basis and included in the IER. The College also recently established a Basic Skills Committee, which is engaged in a detailed assessment of existing college programs and resources that support basic skills or developmental education. 3. The College in concert with the other District entities will complete the development of the Program Discontinuance and Academic Freedom Policies. A draft document of a District Program Discontinuance Policy was developed by a joint subcommittee of the academic senates of the District but was not adopted. Discussions continue at the District Planning Council and the Chancellorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cabinet. At the campus level, in 2006-2007, the Academic Senate President and Executive Vice President initiated discussions regarding Program Discontinuance. The Chancellor and the Academic Senate Presidents met in September 2007 to work on the policy for Academic Freedom. In February 2008, both the Board Policy and Administrative Procedure 4030, Academic Freedom, were adopted by the Board of Trustees.

Student Support Services 1. The College will provide ongoing staff development opportunities regarding the campus based student service programs. Student Support Services coordinates workshops and training throughout the year, which are open to all faculty, staff, and students. On an ongoing basis, Student Support Services staff regularly visit classrooms, staff information booths, and visit off-campus sites to gather 45

information and to collaborate with others. 2. The Collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s commitment to serving its students will be enhanced through providing supplementary employee training programs and, when economically feasible, increasing the number of employees. Student services staff members participate in activities offered throughout the year, participate in quarterly division staff meetings, and are encouraged to attend all staff development programs offered on campus. In addition, staff participate in the Student Support Services Outreach Advisory Team, the Student Ambassador Program, and the Guardian Scholars Advisory Team. Since Spring 2005, four additional positions have been added to the student support services area; three in financial aid and one in EOPS. 3. The College will continue to monitor the matriculation process to insure equal access, opportunity, and success for all students. The College has made significant progress during the current accreditation cycle to continue to ensure equal access, opportunity, and success for all students by assisting them in the completion of their college courses, persistence to the next academic term, and achievement of their educational objectives through all components of the matriculation process: admissions, orientation, assessment, counseling/advisement, and student follow-up. To ensure continued progress in monitoring the matriculation process for all students, the College developed and implemented ten matriculation-related strategies and activities since the last accreditation site visit.

Library and Learning Support Services 1. Librarians will increase their periodic discussions with the faculty at-large, and the Curriculum Committee in particular, regarding information competency, the measurement of student learning outcomes, the status of Library holdings, and the method by which faculty can request the purchase of library materials. Librarians have increased discussions with faculty by attending department and division meetings, organizing activities, and communicating with faculty via flyers and email. The Library also posts information on 46

its website. The new curriculum software system, CurricUNET, requires faculty to consult with a librarian during the curriculum development process to ensure that adequate library materials exist. Also, a librarian serves on the Curriculum Committee, the SLO committee as well as the Learning Communities Advisory Team. At the end of each fiscal year, the Library publishes an annual report that details the Libraryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s holdings and other pertinent statistical data. In addition to circulating and reference materials, the Library has worked with faculty to increase the number of textbooks placed on reserve to increase student access to course material. The Library currently has 1,954 textbooks associated with current courses as well as materials put on reserve by instructors for supplemental reading or viewing. 2. The Library will continue to increase the size of its print and data base collections as the budget permits. The Library added approximately 3,000 public domain titles to its electronic book collection. The Library also purchased 12 electronic reference titles and four additional databases, which are all available through the online catalog. 3. The Library will increase its outreach/ marketing efforts regarding Library services, materials and databases. Particular attention should be paid to groups such as Disabled Students Programs and Services, Extended Opportunity Programs and Services and the Associated Students. A new Instruction Outreach Librarian was hired in early Fall 2007. The Libraryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s website is being redesigned to make it simpler for users. The Library offers tours and orientations to students in DSPS and EOPS. The Library anticipates hiring a new Access Services Reference Librarian who will increase the outreach and marketing efforts even more.

Human Resources 1. The College will recommend that the District negotiate changes with the two faculty unions so that effectiveness in achieving Student Learning Outcomes becomes a component of faculty evaluation. While the College has identified methods to evaluate Cypress College

programs based on their effectiveness in achieving Student Learning Outcomes, it has relatively little influence over pursuing the effectiveness in achieving Student Learning Outcomes as a component of individual faculty evaluation, as this is an item subject to negotiation. The campus did communicate with the District’s Vice Chancellor of Human Resources regarding this Planning Agenda item. 2. The College will develop a written code of ethics for non-instructional personnel. In Spring 2010, the Board adopted Institutional Code of Ethics BP/AP 3050, which states that the North Orange County Community College District upholds a written code of professional ethics for all of its personnel. The comprehensive language of this Boardapproved policy establishes standards of ethical conduct that apply to and encompass all District employee groups. 3. The College will continue to assess staffing needs and increase its personnel when budgetary conditions permit. Beginning in Fall 2007, the College initiated a full-time faculty position allocation process agreed upon by College administration and the Academic Senate that includes the deans and Academic Senate representatives. The Joint Committee on Faculty Positions reviews all full-time faculty position needs and requests and works by consensus to prioritize those requests. In March 2006, the campus finalized a Classified Staff Needs Assessment, which resulted in a prioritized list of position needs identified from across the campus. Funding was identified to add a total of 12 new classified positions since Spring 2005. However, budget reductions to state funded categorical programs resulted in a lack of funds to cover several positions in 2009-2010. The College absorbed those positions using vacancies in the general fund budget, thereby creating a net growth of 4 positions since 2006 and averting any potential layoffs or furloughs. 4. The College will monitor the impact of the reduced Full Time Faculty Obligation on its staffing levels. When the District entered into negotiations with the state over the full-time faculty obligation, Cypress College was in the beginning stages of a period of declining enrollment. Though the District number relative Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

to this obligation was decreased, the impact upon the College was minimized due to the realities of the enrollment situation. During this period and including the 2007-2008 academic year, the College has monitored and reviewed staffing requests on a regular basis. Full-time faculty position requests are solicited and reviewed in a regular process, with the integrity of College programs as the primary consideration in making the allocation decisions. Unfortunately, it is difficult to identify a way to measure the impact of a reduced Full Time Faculty Obligation to the College. 5. The College will continue its efforts to hire personnel of diverse backgrounds. The District’s Office of Human Resources coordinates recruiting efforts for the College by sending all position flyers to a comprehensive distribution list. All vacancies are also posted to the District’s website, and management and full-time faculty vacancies are advertised in various diversity publications. In addition, managers distribute information through their professional organizations, and the District uses other resources to advertise certain disciplines.

Physical Resources 1. The College will investigate the adoption of a centralized scheduling plan for classroom utilization. Subsequent to both campuses’ and School of Continuing Education’s representatives reviewing live demonstrations of a software package that would allow for centralized scheduling for both instructional and noninstructional use as well as creation of a master calendar, the District Information Services Department agreed to purchase the software. 2. The College will develop a plan to proactively and systematically replace and repair major equipment. The College has developed a replacement plan for infrastructure equipment on campus that is not covered in the State Capital Outlay, local bond fund, or State Scheduled Maintenance programs. This includes items such as air handlers, air compressors, and water heaters. In addition to this, a replacement plan for the campus fleet vehicles and maintenance/grounds/custodial equipment has been developed. These plans were presented to the Planning and Budget Committee in Fall 47

2010 with anticipated completion Spring 2011. The College is also evaluating how to develop an equipment replacement plan for significant instructional equipment and the development of funding strategies for all of these plans.

Technology Resources 1. The College and the Office of Academic Computing and Media Services will work with District Information Technology personnel to ensure the integration of the Banner and Blackboard systems. The integration of the Banner and Blackboard systems was completed in August 2007. 2. The Office of Academic Computing and Media Services will offer more training to faculty and staff. In order to accomplish this, consideration will be given to the hiring of additional personnel when the budget permits. Training has been offered for a number of years in the areas of email (basic and advanced) and Web Development (basic and advanced). The Strategic Plan outlines twelve training sessions per year with some being accomplished each semester. However, since faculty and staff have received the initial training for supported software products, formal classes are no longer necessary. Since new employees receive personal training, Academic Computing has elected to extend an offer for additional training to individuals and smaller groups within their offices. These sessions are shorter in length, hands on in a familiar place, personal to those asking a question to include other faculty and staff in and around the same office area, and set up around the customerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s schedule. For the Academic Computing staff conducting these sessions, this process serves to educate them in the unique business needs of that department and/or division. Additionally, that one question being answered initiates several other questions and the process ends with several people becoming more adept using the tools at hand and better able to help one another should the need arise. 3. The College will ensure that the campus network and systems receive continued funding to keep pace with technological changes. One-time funding each year has been adequate to support the hardware needs of the campus as outlined by 48

the Educational Master Plan, the Strategic Plan, and the Technology Plan. Ongoing funding for software and systems maintenance has also been adequate. Looking into the future, it is clear that increased technology needs also require increased hardware, software, and additional personnel resources. With the increasing pressure to have technology services available 24 hours a day, the future demand for resources to provide that service will only increase.

Financial Resources 1. The College will request an increased cash allocation from the District when the budget permits. The Cypress College Vice President of Administrative Services works closely with the budget officers of both Fullerton College and the School of Continuing Education to formulate recommendations to the District Vice Chancellor of Finance and Facilities on how to make allocations of new ongoing or one-time funds for NOCCCD. For a period of nearly two years, presentations were made to the District Planning Council (DPC) on four different funding modifications to the Districtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s allocation model: 1) Growth Beyond Extended Day, 2) Operating Allocation, 3) New Facilities Budget Allocation, and 4) Partnership for Excellence Allocation. Consensus was reached to support options 1 and 4. At the last meeting of the District Planning Council in Spring 2006, the Vice Chancellor of Finance and Facilities distributed an analysis of the current District funding model. Because this was at the end of the school year, there was little time for discussion about the model, and by the Fall of 2007, the idea of further examination of the current allocation model was raised again. A work group was formed comprised of campus Budget Officers, campus Research Directors, and the primary campus Instruction Offices to conduct further analysis and comparison to other multi-college district models. In Spring 2007, a recommendation was approved by DPC to approve allocations to cover late retroactive salary settlements for positions that were funded through categorical programs. In addition, DPC approved a recommendation to allocate one-time resources for Facilities, Equipment Technology, and Infrastructure from funds available in 2006-2007. 2. The District will provide a more thorough Cypress College

orientation and training for all personnel, especially with respect to financial matters. The District Information Services department provides Banner Navigation and Purchase Requisition training to all personnel who need to update their Banner technology and skills. The campus Business Office also provides group or individual supplemental training to campus personnel who need more thorough review.

Decision-Making Roles and Processes 1. The College will promote orientations and training about the various shared governance processes. Each of the constituencies is represented on the various shared-governance committees of the College. Each constituent group representative is charged with the responsibility of informing its representatives on these bodies of the duties and obligations assumed by virtue of their participation. In addition, each shared governance committee begins the academic year by reviewing purpose, mission, duties, and responsibilities of the members. Emphasis is placed on the need for participants in the shared-governance processes of the College to inform their constituent group and to provide input and feedback from that group to the committee. Each Fall, orientations are scheduled for the Direction Committee Chairs, and they in turn conduct orientations for members of their committees. In addition to these sessions, both the Vice President of Administrative Services and the Director of Research and Planning make themselves available to attend division meetings to discuss the annual One-Time Funding Budget Request processes. Several avenues are used to share information about shared governance: publication of the “Cypress College Shared Governance Process Committees and Task Forces,” a database maintained by the Staff Development Office that tracks people serving on each committee, new faculty and classified orientations, and campus forums. 2. The College will make greater efforts to involve students in shared governance processes. Students will be made aware of both the existence of opportunities and the procedures of getting involved. The President’s Office provides the Associated Students Council with a list of campus shared-governance Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

committees that include opportunities for student representation. All Associated Students Council members are required to serve on at least two campus committees. In March 2008, a three-day campus-wide colloquium on strategic planning was held, and six current students participated in this event.

Board and Administrative Organization 1. The College will request that the Board of Trustees and the District continue the process of utilizing Strategic Conversations and consider variety in the format. The College will also request that the Board of Trustees and the District also continue to develop other strategies to receive and encourage input from constituent groups. Since Spring 2005, the Board of Trustees has hosted one “Strategic Conversation” each year. The Strategic Conversations remain the primary vehicle for all District employees and students to speak informally oneon-one or at least in a group discussion with Trustees. With the participation of Cypress College faculty and administrators in Strategic Conversations, issues of importance to this campus have been brought to the attention of Trustees. In addition, starting 2009 - 2010, the Chancellor and Trustees have conducted a “Coffee with the Chancellor” at each campus in order to share ideas and ask questions. 2. The College will regularly review and evaluate the administrative structure to determine its effectiveness and efficiency. In 2004 and 2005, a reorganization task force was formed, chaired by the Executive Vice President, which made recommendations to the President’s Advisory Cabinet. The recommendations were to hire a Dean of Library and Learning Resources and to adjust several of the responsibilities under the Dean of Counseling and Student Development and the Dean of Student Services. In light of four positions being filled by interim managers as of July 1, 2007, a new task force was convened in Fall 2007 to review the management structure and provide recommendations to the President before the end of the Fall semester. The task force recommended to change the Vice President position to a Vice President of Administrative Services, change the Director of Research position to a Director of Re-

search and Planning, and then reduce the ranking of the Director of Budget and Finance allowing for the new Vice President position to assume primary responsibility for budget and finance. The proposed reorganization was shared in several different ways including an open meeting of the task force allowing the campus to ask questions about the proposal, and discussions at the Deans and Directors Meeting, Planning and Budget, and Presidentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Advisory Cabinet. Time was allowed for the constituency groups to gather input and report back to the shared-governance committees.

it can be used to expand a College program into the Anaheim facility.

3. The College will provide a more thorough orientation and training for all personnel, including specific attention to financial and collective bargaining matters. Finance-related training has been provided by the Vice President of Administrative Services and/or staff from the campus Business Office in small groups or oneon-one to new staff members or to areas identified as needing a refresher course on budget processes. District Office of Human Resources staff members have provided managers and deans with training on contract revisions due to the collective bargaining process. The Staff Development Office provided leadership in the development of a Classified Staff Resource Guide to be a useful resource tool for managers and classified staff. 4. The College will encourage the Board of Trustees to give careful consideration to academic concerns when renting out space at the Anaheim Campus and to be particularly alert that such actions not impact negatively the instructional programs of the campuses. Outside vendors have shown an interest in leasing space at the Anaheim Campus. Information regarding vendors and the programs they are interested in offering are discussed in Chancellorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Staff meetings. All of the information regarding the vendor is then shared and discussed with the appropriate dean and faculty at the campus level. If it is determined that leasing space to a vendor will negatively impact a College program, the College President will present this information to the Chancellor with the rationale and justification of why the College does not support such a lease agreement. Vendors have been turned away as a result of this process. When vacancies occur, the College is also given an opportunity to review the space and see if 50

Cypress College

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Vice Chancellor - Human Resources is responsible for ensuring personnel policies and practices are in compliance with federal and state nondiscrimination and equal opportunity statutes and regulations; processing and responding to complaints related to discrimination and sexual harassment; negotiations; administrative hearings, grievance and discipline procedures; provision of interpretation and guidance to administrators, others in areas of negotiated agreements, board policies and procedures. Additionally, Human Resources oversee benefits.

Human Resources

Version2.FC rev

Budget Development

President/Provost

Chancellor

The board defines the vision of the district, serves as a liaison between the district and the community, approves annual budgets and sets policies, among other responsibilities. The Board takes input from several constituent groups on campus, such as the Academic Senate, the Budget & Planning Committees, and the Shared Governance Committees. The Board also invites comments from general public. The Chancellor is the Chief Executive Officer of the District and is responsible for implementation of the vision and mission set by the Board of Trustees. The President/Provost is the Chief Executive Officer of the respective campus and is responsible for leading the College to achieve its vision and mission. Budget is developed under the leadership of Vice Chancellor – Finance & Facilities in consultation with campuses. The campus participation comes via its Planning and Budget Committee. The District Planning Committee also provides input to the process.

Administrative Services

Description

Policy & Regulations Board of Trustees

Function

Functional Map

P- District S - College

P – District S - College

P - College

P - District

P - District S - College

Responsibility P – Primary S - Secondary

Vice Chancellor – Finance & Facilities, Vice President, Budget Director Vice Chancellor – Human Resources, Executive Vice President, Vice Presidents

Board Shared Governance Committees

Title of Responsible Person

Cypress College

The Office of Equity & Diversity strives to maintain relationships with various community resources to promote equity and diversity, monitor programs and activities to ensure compliance with state and federal laws, conduct in-service training for administration, faculty and staff regarding hiring procedures, equal employment opportunity, prevention of unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment in the academic setting/work environment.

Each campus is independently responsible to ensure a safe environment for the students, faculty, and staff.

The purpose of the Grants Procurement is to identify grant opportunities, develop the application, monitor use of grant dollars (if allocated) and submit final reports.

Foundation fosters relationship among the communities and the college with the objective of raising funds that can be used for College activities. In addition to the college efforts, the district is also engaging in fund-raising activities.

Equity & Diversity

Campus Safety

Grants

Foundation

Version2.FC rev

Business services are responsible for accounting, purchasing, budget administration, risk management and fund disbursement. Although funds are disbursed from the district office, the approval process starts from the campuses.

Description

Business Services

Function

Functional Map

P - College P - District

P – College S - District

P – College P - District

P – District S - College

Responsibility P – Primary S - Secondary P – District S - College

Chancellor, Presidents, Executive Directors

Executive Vice President, Vice Presidents, Deans, Budget Director

Vice Presidents, Directors

Title of Responsible Person Vice Chancellor - Finance & Facilities, Vice President, Budget Director, Managers Chancellor, Executive Vice President, Vice President, District Director – Equity & Diversity

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Although a part of Instructional Services, Distance Education (DE) merits a special functional definition as it is one of the fast emerging areas. DE develops, offers and evaluates online and hybrid courses. DE collaborates closely with the Academic Computing and Media Services to ensure availability of appropriate digital infrastructure that facilitates student learning.

Distance Education

Version2.FC rev

President of the Academic Senate is responsible for curriculum development, delivery of instruction, and assessment of student learning outcomes. Preparation of class schedule and maintenance of catalog are primary responsibilities of Instructional Services. Under the leadership of Executive Vice President/Vice President, the instructional deans ensure planning, development, and delivery of instructional services.

Instructional Services

Responsibility P – Primary S - Secondary P - College

P - College

P – College S - District

The purpose of IR & P is to provide information to the campus on the contextual issues based on data driven research; to conduct studies on effectiveness of campus activities with respect to student success and learning and to promote a culture of evidence. The research outcomes are used to drive planning agenda and discussions. The District Public Affairs Office is responsible for coordinating the P- District District’s legislative advocacy efforts and special District projects (such as P - College the Green Planning Team); District communications with employees, news media, and the community; and the District’s public relations and marketing initiatives. The Campus Public Information Offices are responsible for their individual campus communications with employees, students, news media, and the community, and their campus public relations and marketing initiatives. The District Public Affairs Director and Campus Public Information Officers meet on a regular basis to plan collaborative communications, public relations, and marketing initiatives, and to keep each other informed of their individual initiatives.

Description

Instructional Services

Public Affairs/ Information

Institutional Research & Planning

Function

Functional Map

Chancellor, Executive Vice President/ Vice President, Deans, Academic Senate President Executive Vice President, Vice President, Deans, DE Coordinators

District Director – Public Affairs, Campus Public Information Officers

Title of Responsible Person Vice President, Directors

Cypress College

The bursar’s office provides all students with financial services related to their educational experience and other support services for campus programs and clubs.

Description

The Admissions and Records Office is responsible for the admission and registration processes, reporting enrollment and attendance data, ensuring the accuracy and maintenance of student records.

EOPS assists students with economic, linguistic, and educational challenges to enroll and succeed in post-secondary education and successfully prepare for careers.

Financial Aid intends to provide assistance to students with demonstrated financial need.

Extended Opportunities Program & Services (EOPS)

Financial Aid

Version2.FC rev

The DSP & S provides accommodation to students with disabilities that ensure their equal access to college programs and maximize their potential for success.

Disabled Students Program and Services (DSP & S)

Categorical CARE program assists single parents receiving Temporary Aid to Needy Programs – CARE/ Families (TANF) to increase their educational skills, become more CalWORKS confident, and move from welfare. CalWORKS assists students to become self-sufficient and gain independence from public assistance.

Bursar

Function

Admissions, Record, and Registration

Student Services

closely with the Academic Computing and Media Services to ensure availability of appropriate digital infrastructure that facilitates student learning.

Functional Map

P - College

Responsibility P – Primary S - Secondary P - College

P - Colleges

Executive Vice President, Vice Presidents, Deans – A & R Title of Responsible Person Vice President, Budget Director, Managers Executive Vice President, Vice President, Deans, Managers, Faculty Coordinators

Deans, DE Coordinators

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

P - College

The LLRC help students become better learners, provides students with a comfortable, supportive, and attractive learning environment, and help students with preparation at all levels

The Student Activities Center creates and provides students with a safe and welcoming environment away from the academic demands that they face on campus, support all active campus clubs, and provides a variety of activities that enhance student life

Library & Learning Resources Center (LLRC) Student Activities Center

Version2.FC rev

P - College

The International Student Services helps the international students integrate with the campus atmosphere

International Students

P - College

Counseling department enhances student learning and success by providing academic, career, and personal counseling

Counseling

Responsibility P â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Primary S - Secondary P - College

P - College

Career center provides resources and support services designed to assist students prepare for a career and life-long learning.

Description

The goal of Matriculation is to ensure that all students who are admitted to college complete their courses, persist to the next academic term, and achieve their academic objectives. Health Services provides quality health care, education, and information to students to help reduce the need for off-site health services

Career Center

Function

Health Services

Matriculation

financial need.

Functional Map

Vice Presidents, Deans, Directors Title of Responsible Person Executive Vice President, Vice President, Deans, Manager Executive Vice President, Vice President, Deans Executive Vice President, Vice President, Deans, Managers Executive Vice President, Vice President, Deans Executive Vice President, Vice President, Deans, Manager

Cypress College

Version2.FC rev

Food Services

Food Services is a subcontracted service.

Description

Function

Maintenance & Operations Bookstore

Information Technology

Facilities Planning and Construction has the responsibility of procurement, construction, maintenance, and operations of all district facilities and construction projects. Responsibilities include coordinating all contracts, leases, facilities, planning, construction, and maintenance. Information Services (District) and Academic Computing Technologies (Campuses) plans for procurement, replacement, maintenance, and support of all digital infrastructure and systems used for administrative and student learning purposes. Responsibilities include management of student information, financial information, human resource information, email, web services, networks, servers and training. M & O is responsible for all the physical plants, building, and grounds at the campuses. The goal of the Bookstore is to offer books and supplies to the students for purchase.

Facilities & Infrastructure

Description

The Transfer Center provides a range of services intended to facilitate the preparation of transfer students, especially those who are historically and culturally underrepresented in the campus

Facilities Planning & Construction

Function

Transfer Center

Functional Map

Responsibility P – Primary S - Secondary P - College

P - College

P - District P - College

P – District S - College

Responsibility P – Primary S - Secondary

P - College

Vice Presidents, Directors Vice President, Budget Director, Managers Title of Responsible Person Vice President, Budget Director

Vice Chancellors Vice Presidents Directors Vice Presidents, Directors (District & College)

Executive Vice President, Vice President, Faculty (CC), Manager (FC) Title of Responsible Person

Standard I Institutional Mission and Effectiveness

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

Standard IA: Mission The institution demonstrates strong commitment to a mission that emphasizes achievement of student learning and to communicating the mission internally and externally. The institution uses analyses in an ongoing and systematic cycle of evaluation, integrated planning, implementation, and re-evaluation to verify and improve the effectiveness by which the mission is accomplished.

Mission The institution has a statement of mission that defines the institution’s broad educational purposes, its intended student population, and its commitment to achieve student learning.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College has clearly articulated statements of mission, vision, and core values that are widely circulated on the campus. Apart from being displayed in divisional and various other administrative offices, the mission statement is published in the College Catalog: Mission Cypress College enriches students’ lives by providing high quality education for transfer to fouryear institutions, associate degrees, career technical education, and certificate course work, as well as basic skills and opportunities for lifelong learning. The college is committed to promoting student learning and success, embracing diversity, and contributing to both the economic and social development of the surrounding community (1.4). The mission statement is reviewed periodically to evaluate if the institutional goals and objectives satisfy the needs of the changing student population. The current mission statement was developed during strategic planning sessions in Spring 2004. The dialogue began in Spring 2003 at a two-day College retreat when the institutional values were developed. This was followed by another retreat in Spring 2004 where the mission and vision were developed. As part of the creation of the 2008-2011 Strategic Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Plan, the College Vision was evaluated. The committee charged with this task reaffirmed the core elements of the College Vision and concluded that the College was successful in fulfilling the promise of its vision and that it needed to do a better job in communication of the College’s accomplishments to a broader audience. With this goal in mind, the vision of the college now reads as follows: Vision A premier learning community recognized for supporting student success and enriching society. The drafts of mission and vision were sent to the campus community for their review, comments, and feedback. A “blog” was created to seek campus-wide comment. After the reviews, the mission and vision were presented to the Planning and Budget Committee, which recommended it to the President’s Advisory Cabinet (PAC). PAC approved the vision and mission in October 2004. The Board of Trustees approved the new mission statement in November 2004 (Strategic Plan, 2004-2008). The periodic review of vision and mission is typically integrated with the strategic planning cycle. During the last strategic planning (Strategic Plan 2008-2011) process, over 45 faculty, staff, and administrators attended a colloquium at the UCLA Conference Center in March 2008. The colloquium participants represented different departments and constituencies. The participants reviewed existing reports and plans, evaluated information gathered during interviews with students and colleagues, researched demographic information, and identified challenges facing the campus. After careful consideration of student needs, the participants decided to maintain the mission as written and approved in November 2004. The vision was modified and approved as part of the creation of the 2008-2011 Strategic Plan. Along with the mission and vision, the core values driving Cypress College are: Core Values Cypress College is committed to: Excellence — quality and high standards in instruction and student services, supported by professional growth for faculty and staff 59

Integrity — an ethical standard that emphasizes honesty, fairness, accountability, and trust Collegiality — an environment that emphasizes teamwork, collaboration, communication, courtesy and respect both on campus and with the surrounding community Inclusiveness — a community that embraces diverse individuals; provides an accessible, supportive climate; and encourages a variety of perspectives and opinions The mission and vision, together with core values, drive the strategic actions at the College. The strategic planning process analyzes the demographic information and reviews if the mission, vision, and core values are guiding the actions of the College and fulfilling the needs of students. Based on the analysis of quantitative and qualitative data during the strategic planning process, the institution identifies a select number of strategic directions that are most suited to satisfy student needs. In the current Strategic Plan, there are five such strategic directions and 13 clearly articulated goals under the five strategic directions. An annual evaluation of plans and goals, as well as their alignment with the North Orange County Community College District, is conducted and presented to the Board. In its over forty years of existence, Cypress College has demonstrated its commitment to students and enriching their lives through higher education. As a California Community College, Cypress College is an openaccess institution. The College admits all who wish to apply and are eligible to enroll. The open-access policy helps fulfill the critical mission of providing access to higher education to the adjoining community members. The open-admission policy allows students with any of the following qualifications to apply for admission:

◊

Any high school student

◊

Any person possessing a G.E.D.

◊

Any person possessing a California High school Proficiency Certificate

◊

Any person 18 years of age or older who may benefit from instruction, and

◊

Any K-12 student who qualifies for the Special Admit Program

Age distribution of students (Figure 1) shows that nearly two out of three students at Cypress College are be60

low 25 years of age. Median age of students is 22 years. The mix of students of different age groups demonstrates the commitment towards students with different goals. Students enroll at Cypress College for a variety of reasons, such as learning skills, basic skills improvement, earning degrees or certificates, and transferring to four-year institutions (Institutional Effectiveness

Figure 1

Report, 2008-09). In order to cater to the needs of students, Cypress College offers a comprehensive program of instruction that prepares students to develop basic skills, receive vocational training, and prepare for transfer to four-year colleges and universities. The College enrolled over 16,000 students in Fall 2009 as well as over 15,000 in Spring 2010 (1.1). Over the last five years, nearly 65% of students successfully completed the courses they enrolled in (1.2). Several programs cater to the needs of students seeking a career technical education. In fact, almost 83% of students who earned a career technical certificate or degree in the 20082009 school year found jobs (1.3). The College community includes members of many surrounding cities as well as areas throughout the state of California, other states, and other countries. Nearly fifty percent of the students come from adjoining cities defined as the primary service area of the College (Figure 2). The relationship between Cypress College and local communities and high schools resulted in a large proportion of students coming from the adjoining areas. In Fall 2009, 39% of students enrolled at Cypress College came from the 15 feeder high schools. This reflects commitment of the College to contribute to social and economic development of its surrounding communities. Cypress College shows that it is committed to economic development and relationships with Cypress College

Self Evaluation

Figure 2

the community through active memberships in chambers of commerce of eight adjoining cities (Anaheim, Buena Park, Cypress, Garden Grove, La Palma, Stanton, Seal Beach, and Rossmoor) and Rotary organizations. The strong community relationship is further demonstrated by the participation of local industries in College programs. For example, the College runs an automobile technology program in collaboration with the Toyota Motor Corporation. The Cypress College Foundation is also a leader for the College in working with and for the surrounding community. Students come to Cypress College from a variety of backgrounds (Figure 3). The College periodically compares its population with the overall population in Orange County. The race and ethnic composition of the student population consistently represents that of the county. The College has been a “minority majority” institution for a considerable period of time, when no single community had an overwhelming presence on the campus. Over the last three years, the proportion of Hispanic students has consistently increased. In 20092010, the Hispanic students became the largest group on the campus. This is commensurate with growth of the Hispanic population in Orange County.

The mission statement reflects the goals and commitments of the College. Nearly 64% of students from under-represented ethnic minorities and over 39% first-generation in college (Spring 2010), the College successfully provides access to the population who needs it the most. The local community is well represented by the students who enroll in the college. The support, involvement, diversity, and economic enrichment of the local community are all part of the culture of the College. Assessment, orientation, and counseling — three matriculation services — have progressively served a larger student population over the years. During 2008-2009, a total of 9,575 students were assessed, 31,062 received counseling, and 4,925 received orientation services. The Student Equity Plan specifically compares the performance among various student groups. Based on the findings, special programs such as Puente are offered to help integrate the students to College and help them succeed.

Planning Agenda None. 1. The institution establishes student learning programs and services aligned with its purposes, its character, and its student population.

Descriptive Summary The institutional mission and vision drive planning, the development of programs and services, and allocation of resources. The Educational Master Plan 20062016 used the mission and vision as guiding principles

Nearly 64% of the students in Spring 2010 were from ethnic minority groups and almost 40% of them were first generation colleges. In accordance with its mission, Cypress College not only provides access to higher education to these students, but also tracks their success. Note: All charts were prepared by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning, Cypress College.

Figure 3

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

to set long-term goals. Every three years, the campus engages in a strategic planning process that evaluates demographic information, discusses challenges and opportunities facing the College, and creates an action plan for the three-year period. The most recent Strategic Plan was developed in 2008 for the period 2008-2011. Keeping with the institutional mission, a primary goal is to help students with diverse interests and needs meet their educational objectives. The current Strategic Plan has five broad directions.

Strategic Plan Directions Cypress College staff and students recognize the importance and interdependence of diversity, innovation, technology, and staff development. These threads are reflected in all of the five strategic directions. There are multiple goals that address each direction. The Strategic Plan also provides specific objectives that would collectively fulfill the goals. The accomplishment of goals and objectives is reviewed annually.

serve. Based on the mission and vision, Cypress College also developed Institutional Learning Outcomes (ILO). The institutional learning outcomes articulate what students are intended to learn at the completion of their education and what they are assessed for.

Institutional Learning Outcomes (ILOs) Students leaving Cypress College with a vocational certificate and/or an Associate Degree in Liberal Arts, Occupational Studies, or General Studies, or students transferring with general education certification will demonstrate common learning outcomes. Institutional Learning Outcomes (ILOs) refer to the scope of requirements either for a vocational certificate or for any AA/AS degree or general education certification rather than individual courses or programs.

Designing, enhancing, and delivering comprehensive and accessible instruction to promote academic excellence and student learning.

The College assesses service to students who complete an overall college degree or certificate by examining and assessing General Education and Basic Skills PLOs. The College also assesses service to students in specific courses by examining general student achievement in course-level SLOs.

Direction 2 — Student and Academic Support Services

A student who receives a certificate from Cypress College…

Developing and providing comprehensive student and academic support services to foster a positive and effective learning environment.

• Will have acquired a specified set of skills required for particular employment opportunities

Direction 3 — Campus Support and Infrastructure

• Will have achieved the necessary competencies to enter a particular employment field

Ensuring that campus support services and resources are provided in an effective and efficient manner.

• Will be aware of additional educational and career opportunities within that field

Direction 4 — Climate, Involvement, and Communication

A student who graduates from Cypress College with an AA or AS degree in any field or transfers with a general education certification…

Direction 1 — Instruction

Promoting a campus climate that embraces diversity and supports excellence, integrity, collegiality, and inclusiveness, by supporting communication and involvement throughout the College. Direction 5 — Collaborative Relations and Marketing Improving marketing efforts and establishing and strengthening collaborative relationships with other educational institutions and with the communities we 62

• Will possess a breadth of knowledge and experiences from the areas of the humanities and arts; the natural sciences and mathematics; the social sciences; and physical education

• Will possess skills for life-long learning in oral and written communication; human adaptability and health; critical thinking, including deductive/inductive reasoning, problem-solvCypress College

ing, and quantitative/qualitative reasoning; and information competency

• Will possess an understanding of civic society and culture in the areas of citizen rights and responsibilities; the role of diversity in modern society; and the nature of ethical decision making (1.4).

The Strategic Plan direction, together with the ILOs and SLOs, clearly set the institutional intent to serve its students. Student needs are assessed by carefully evaluating the demographic information and aligning resources to serve students.

Programs Designed to Serve Students The College provides services aligned with its mission through a full-service student service operation for incoming and current students. With the increase in the Hispanic population in Orange County, the number of students whose first language is not English has also grown. In fact, in Fall 2009, Hispanic students were the single largest ethnic group on campus. To serve these students well, the College strengthened its English as Second Language (ESL) program. The improved performance in ESL reflects the effect of this initiative. Another example of aligning student needs and services is in the area of Basic Skills. As the number of first generation students and students from ethnic minorities has increased, the need for a strong basic skills program was recognized (Figure 4). Under the tutelage of the Basic Skills Committee, the College has developed a multi-year plan to serve under-prepared students (1.14). The results are evident from the improved performance of students moving

Figure 4

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

from basic skills to credit courses. Each of the student services areas carefully evaluates the entering student population and offers services to best suit the needs of students. The Counseling Division provides academic counseling, orientation, classes, career information, college transfer information, course articulation, and matriculation placement services. Financial Aid provides grant and loan information and distribution services. The number of Pell Grant recipients has increased by 39% between 2006-2007 and 2008-2009 (Dashboard of Institutional Effectiveness 1.13). Assessment provides testing, course placement in math and English, and transcript evaluation to place students in the correct achievement level for success in coursework. Specialized programs to help disabled students and economically disadvantaged are also available in the Disabled Students Program and Services office, TRAC, and the CARE offices. In addition, the Admissions and Records, Information Counter, and Bursars offices stand ready to help students enroll in classes. Enrollment and admissions are summarized in the “Six Easy Steps” process (1.5). Most of the enrollment services are available online 24/7 through the College website and the College portal: myGateway. Students can apply, enroll, and pay for classes online. A new Student Services Building was dedicated in Spring 2009. All student services are available near or around the center of the campus by the College campanile. Cypress College is proud to accept 100% of its eligible applicants. The College uses CCCApply, which was developed for California Community Colleges as a California Community College Chancellor’s Office Funded Application System. Because of the open enrollment commitment of all California Community Colleges, Cypress College accepts over 20,000 applications per year (1.1). Students who enroll go through the Six Easy Steps to the Registration Process: Admission, Assessment, Orientation, Counseling, Enrollment Fee Waiver (optional), and finally Registration. By following these steps, students are coached, encouraged, and placed in classes and programs according to their educational goals. Cypress College demonstrates effective measures of instruction, student learning outcomes, and program completion (1.6). Cypress College focuses its attention on student learning. Over and over, students come first. Starting with 63

student services and into the classroom, student learning outcomes have been established. The latter part of the Mission Statement reflects this commitment to students and student success.

relate to the Strategic Plan 2008-2011 and the overriding Educational Master Plan (1.7, 1.8).

Further evidence of commitment to student learning is demonstrated in the institutional learning outcomes as well as individual courses and programs. In addition, discussions of student learning are part of the Strategic Plan Directions One and Two and were prominent in forming of the directions (1.11). The Mission Statement also includes a statement of commitment to promoting student learning and success (1.4). This ties with the student learning outcomes that are part of the College’s student services, courses, and programs.

The learning programs and services of the College are aligned with its mission, The student body is representative of the service area of the College. The College periodically analyzes how well the College mission is aligned with student needs and how students are benefiting from the services offered by the College. The mission statement aligns the College with its students and community, and its commitment to diversity. Its mission statement also aligns the College with its purpose of being a comprehensive college committed to student learning and success, and social and economic development in the community.

Every two years, the College engages the service of Noel-Levitz — a national organization — to survey its students (Figure 5). The survey not only measures student satisfaction at Cypress College, but also compares it with other institutions. The last survey, conducted in Fall 2009, showed that Cypress College student satisfaction is ahead of the national average in all the areas measured. Despite overall high level of student satisfaction, however, there are areas that need focus and improvement. The survey results are discussed with Deans, Leadership Team, Planning and Budget Committee, and President’s Advisory Cabinet. Areas for improvement are identified based on the survey, and remedial action is formulated. For example, the survey identified that students expressed concern regarding advising services. The issue was analyzed, and an action plan to identify the underlying cause of concern was formulated. Beginning Fall 2010, all students will receive a quick survey after advising sessions, and the results will be analyzed. This is an example of how the College uses assessment results to improve student learning. A wide range of assessments are applied relating to Cypress College students: Student achievement, success rates, retention rates, basic skills improvement in math and English, persistence, awards of degrees and certificates, and transfer to California State Universities and Universities of California. Other assessments applied relate to enrollment, characteristics of students, staff, service areas, instructional programs, student service programs, campus support, and special programs. Student learning outcomes have become integrated as part of the assessment process. All of these assessments 64

Self Evaluation

Planning Agenda None. 2. The mission statement is approved by the governing board and published.

Descriptive Summary The mission statement of the College was presented for review again in Fall 2008 to the faculty, administration, and students. During the previous Spring, it was reviewed by Planning and Budget, the President’s Advisory Cabinet as well as by the Leadership Team. The Planning and Budget Committee approved it in Fall 2008, with final approval given by the President’s Advisory Cabinet on September 18, 2008 (1.5). During its last review, the mission statement of Cypress College was presented as part of the College Strategic Plan on December 9, 2008, and was entered as formally received by the North Orange County Community College District (NOCCCD) Board of Trustees at its December 9, 2008, meeting (1.6). It is published in the College Catalog, Schedule of Classes, and the College’s website (1.3, 1.4, 1.10).

Self Evaluation The mission statement was reviewed on campus through the shared-governance practice and process and presented to the NOCCCD Board of Trustees in a timely manner. Cypress College

cess and the inclusiveness of all the stakeholders as well as Foundation Board of Directors and other community partners (1.7).

Self Evaluation

Figure 5

Planning Agenda None. 3. Using the institution’s governance and decision-making processes, the institution reviews its mission statement on a regular basis and revises it as necessary.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College is a shared-governance institution. Major planning, policies, and decisions are reviewed at all levels of governance. Various committees, the Academic Senate, and groups both formally and informally review, discuss, and debate issues and policies. The mission statement is reviewed and revised according to this process approximately every three years. This review and process is detailed earlier in this section. Since the mission statement is part of the Strategic Plan, it is reviewed each time the Strategic Plan is reviewed. The current Strategic Plan (1.7) covers years 2008-2011 and was developed during 2008 involving many participants from the campus and advisory groups from the community. With this three-year process, there is substantial dialog between the sharedgovernance groups — students, faculty, managers, and classified staff — providing substantial opportunities for input and decision making by all stakeholders. When the Strategic Plan comes to the end of its cycle, the Vice President of Administrative Services and the Director of the Office of Institutional Research and Planning take the lead to bring the constituencies of the campus together to review and revise the College Strategic Plan. The College President’s message on Page 1 of the current Strategic Plan describes the proInstitutional Self Study — Spring 2011

The College gathers demographic information, labor market information, and academic information of the adjoining communities as the basic input for the strategic plan process. The representatives from different sections of the campus then engage in a dialog to identify strategic directions that would serve potential students. The core groups of stakeholders, students, members of the community, faculty, managers, and staff, responding to community demographics and advisory groups, meet to use assessment data and work as a team to use the shared-governance process to update the mission statement of the college.

Planning Agenda None. 4. The institution’s mission is central to institutional planning and decision making.

Descriptive Summary The mission statement is central to the Educational Master Plan (EMP), the long term planning document of the College. The EMP was created for the ten-year period 2006 to 2016. In order to identify short-term goals that would contribute to accomplishment of the broad goals of EMP, several planning documents were created. These planning documents, such as Basic Skills and Distance Education, focus on specific operational areas of the College. Every three years, a strategic plan is drawn up that provides the directions that the College wants to pursue during the strategic plan period of three years. The relationship and hierarchy of plans is shown in the planning diagram (Figure 6). Thus, the institutional mission is integrated through the Educational Master Plan (EMP) into the Strategic Plan document along with Vision, Core Values, and Strategic Directions (1.8). Program Review, Student Services Master Plan, and Department EMP as well as the Institutional Educational Master Plan are all examples of the breadth to which the mission statement is included.

◊

Funding processes for professional 65

conferences, Program Review, and One-Time Budget Requests are other examples of the college commitment to the Strategic Plan Direction One tie required to get funding.

◊

The mission statement is integrated into the Strategic Plan. Page 3 of the current plan documents the purpose of the plan and its use in the decisions and allocations made at the College (1.9). Cypress College’s decision making is directly prompted by its mission statement, which in turn directly influences the College’s planning process and all departmental and institutional planning. More specifically, the College’s mission, practices, and decision-making processes can be found in the College Catalog, Educational Master Plan, and Student Services Master Plan (1.3, 1.8, 1.11). All decisions pertaining to budget changes, program development, and student service development originates from the planning process. These decisions are confirmed by ensuring that there is a direct connection to the College’s mission statement. For example, the Cypress College Principles for Budget Reductions review (updated 9/18/08) indicates specifically that Cypress College will keep in mind its vision, mission, and core values when making budget reductions. More specifically, Reference point 5 states, “Recognize that Student Services are a critical part of this college mission” (1.12).

rent mission of the College and who it is serving. The College’s emphasis is on student learning and makes its decisions as a result of the shared-governance culture of the College. The College ties budgets and funding to student learning outcomes and shows outcomes and results as reflected in its mission statement. The College regularly seeks input from and listens to suggestions from its employees and community.

Planning Agenda None. Reference Documents 1.1 CCCApply, Applications Report, XAP Software, Culver City, California 1.2 Cypress College Institutional Effectiveness Report 2008-2009, November, 2009 — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rreports.aspx 1.3 Cypress College Catalog 2009 – 2010 — www. cypresscollege.edu/academics/CollegeCatalog.aspx 1.4 Cypress College Schedule of Classes 2010 —www. cypresscollege.edu/academics/ScheduleofClasses. aspx 1.5 Meeting minutes, September 18, 2008, Cypress College President’s Advisory Cabinet — J:\President’s Advisory Cabinet\2008-2009 1.6 Meeting minutes, December 9, 2008, North Orange County Community College Board of Trustees — www.nocccd.edu/Trustees/MtgMinutesArchive2010.htm 1.7 Cypress College Strategic Plan 2008-2011 — www. cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ pdocuments.aspx 1.8 Educational Master Plan — www.cypresscollege. edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx

Self Evaluation

1.9

The College’s broad student learning programs and services coordinate well with its educational purposes, goals, and student population. As of Fall 2010, the College has begun creating a centralized repository of plans and goals where all the plans, stated goals, and their relationship to the College mission will be identified. The mission statement drives all the planning processes at the College. Additionally, the College periodically reviews its mission statement to reflect the cur-

1.10 Cypress College website — www.cypresscollege. edu/

Leadership Team Meeting

1.11 Student Services Master Plan — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments. aspx 1.12 Cypress College Principles for Budget Reductions — J:\President’s Advisory Cabinet\2008-2009 1.13 Dashboard of Institutional Effectiveness — www. cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/

Cypress College

SE/2009-2010IERDashboard_alt.pdf 1.14 Basic Skills Plan — www.cypresscollege.edu/ about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspxFinal.4-25-08.pdf

1.15 Institutional Research and Planning — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx

Figure 6

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Standard IB: Improving Institutional Effectiveness The institution demonstrates a conscious effort to produce and support student learning, measure that learning, assess how well learning is occurring, and make changes to improve student learning. The institution also organizes its key processes and allocates its resources to effectively support student learning. The institution demonstrates its effectiveness by providing 1) evidence of the achievement of student learning outcomes and 2) evidence of institution and program performance. The institution uses ongoing and systematic evaluation and planning to refine its key processes and improve student learning. 1. The institution maintains an ongoing, collegial, self-reflective dialogue about the continuous improvement of student learning and institutional processes

Descriptive Summary Cypress College has long engaged in an integrated, collegial, and self-reflective dialogue about continual improvement of the College and its student learning processes, programs, and services. Constituent groups have established internal structures and procedures such as program review and budget allocation model so that their ideas, initiatives, and concerns can be advanced to College-level planning bodies. These planning bodies — in particular the President’s Advisory Cabinet (PAC), Leadership Team, and the Planning and Budget Committee (PBC) — bring together all College constituents to discuss, plan for, and allocate resources as needed. Along with faculty and staff participation, the College has encouraged the inclusion of students in the designated campus committees. The Associated Student representatives participate in all committees including PAC, Planning and Budget, Curriculum, Diversity, Academic Senate, District Planning Council, and Student Learning Outcomes. Committee participations ensure that students’ opinions are considered in the decision-making process. Various dialogues are structured as determined by campus groups charged with different action plans as outlined in the 68

following paragraphs. Significant discussion has taken place regarding planning, accreditation, program review, student learning outcomes, matriculation, research, grant writing, the planning and budget process, the curriculum development process, and other collaborative activities. Although these activities have not always been recognized as “dialogues,” they do reflect the primary intent of the dialogue concept, which is to create “a group discussion among ‘colleagues’ that is designed to explore complex issues, create greater group intelligence, and facilitate group learning” (2.37). At Cypress College, these dialogues have taken many forms that involve faculty, staff, administration, students, and community members to provide discussion and the expression of ideas, concerns, and objections. A. Student Learning Outcomes (SLO) Dialogue: When Cypress College embarked on the exploration of a new type of SLO assessment, dialogues and forums were scheduled to introduce and facilitate the development of the process. These meetings were open to all faculty and instructional deans. Issues and processes were openly discussed; concerns were heard and documented. In Fall 2003 and Spring 2004, a series of dialogues produced a list of Institutional Learning Outcomes (ILO) that were approved by the Academic Senate in April 2004, adopted by the College in May 2004, and published in the 2004-2005 College Catalog (2.1). In Fall 2004, another series of dialogues led to the mapping of all instructional courses to ILOs according to these two factors: the extent to which the course provides opportunities for students to achieve the ILO, and the level of mastery, which reflects the degree to which students are expected to achieve the ILO by the time they complete the course (2.2). In addition, the Fall 2004 dialogue group set the groundwork for course SLO assessment. In Fall 2005, an SLO Trainer was hired to develop and deliver SLO writing workshops to divisions and departments. In May 2006, another set of dialogues were held to discuss the best way to proceed with SLO assessment. In Fall 2007, six separate dialogues resulted in a series of SLO Assessment Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) and Recommendations, which were approved by the Academic Senate by the end of the semester (2.3). Prior to these dialogues, the SLO Team consisted of the SLO CoCypress College

ordinator, the SLO Assessment Facilitator, the Staff Development Coordinator, and the Director of Institutional Research. As a result of the dialogues, an Expanded SLO Team comprised of divisional representatives was created and has met once a month since (2.4). During Spring 2008, a subcommittee was formed to evaluate available assessment management software. A recommendation was made to the Expanded SLO Committee about the software most appropriate for the College. The subcommittee met several times and selected seven different software systems for further evaluation. After observing the software capabilities through web conferences, the subcommittee selected four systems for live, on-campus presentations open to all faculty members, administrators, and district colleagues. These presentations were held in April 2008; subsequently, TracDat — an assessment management software — was selected and purchased in Fall 2008. Before the implementation and configuration of TracDat, the SLO Team requested that an Institutional Effectiveness Task Force be convened to review all planning, program review, and budgeting processes of the College. With the approval and adoption of the Institutional Effectiveness Plan (2.11) by the Academic Senate and President’s Advisory Cabinet in May 2009, configuration of TracDat occurred in May 2009, and training on the TracDat system began in October 2009. In April 2009 and September 2009, two forums were held to discuss General Education assessment (2.5). As a result of the forums, a General Education Committee was formed with divisional representation to explore the best way to assess general education learning outcomes. The General Education Committee met several times in Fall of 2009 and Spring of 2010 and drafted the General Education learning outcomes. The committee’s recommendations were taken to the Academic Senate for approval before the assessment process began (2.99). Starting Spring 2010, the Curriculum committee required all faculty members to include the student learning outcomes on course syllabi (2.100). The documentation work done by the SLO Team was recognized as exemplary by RP Group, a statewide research and planning organization. B. Institutional Effectiveness Dialogue: The history of dialogues on Institutional Effectiveness goes back to Fall 2002 when a task force was formed to Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

recommend a process for regular evaluation of institutional effectiveness. The taskforce, which consisted of faculty, administrators, and staff, reviewed models from other colleges, identified strengths and weaknesses in existing campus assessment processes, and considered ways to align the institutional effectiveness review process with the planning and budget process (2.6). The task force efforts were followed with a campus-wide colloquium on institutional effectiveness in March 2003 (2.7). Subsequently, Student Services Quality Review (2.8, 2.9) and Campus Support Services Quality Review (2.10) were developed in Fall 2003 and Spring 2004, respectively. Another Institutional Effectiveness Task Force consisting of 14 members (two students; two researchers; two deans; one staff; and seven faculty members) was commissioned in 2009 to develop an Institutional Effectiveness Plan. The Task Force met several times during Spring 2009 and conducted a review of all student learning outcomes processes, College program review processes, and Strategic Plan/Educational Master Plan action plans and reporting processes at Cypress College. Through various dialogues, an integrated system was developed to evaluate how effectively the institution fulfills its mission. During this time, the student learning outcome management software, TracDat, was configured. TracDat is a relational database and outcomes management system that links student learning outcomes with course, program, and department goals and establishes the connection among the accomplishment of the departmental goals, aligning them with strategic plan goals and institutional mission (2.11). The final objective is to centralize all assessment activities, including program review, in TracDat. C. Strategic Planning Dialogue: The process of dialogue has been integral to the Strategic Planning process from its inception. The 20002004 and 2004-2008 strategic plans were developed with involvement from a wide spectrum of the Cypress College community that included students and employees as well as the Foundation Board of Directors and other community partners. The 2008-2011 Strategic Plan was developed based on the input from the nearly 50 members of the Cypress College community who attended the Strategic Planning Colloquium. The participants included all segments of the campus, from students to faculty and managers to classified staff. The 69

colloquium brought together many varied perspectives about the campus. Their work was then synthesized, sorted, analyzed, and coalesced into a working draft. That draft was then shared across campus communities for review, input, and revision (2.12, 2.13).

cation Plan received endorsement of the Curriculum Committee and approval by the Cypress College Academic Senate.

D. Planning and Budget Dialogue:

By far, though, most of the dialogues that occur on campus have occurred in settings that do not utilize the term but which do follow the procedures. The primary assumption of a dialogue is that participants view themselves as colleagues. Cypress College has adopted a Core Value of Collegiality (2.22), the concept that a campus should be “an environment that emphasizes teamwork, collaboration, communication, courtesy and respect both on the campus and with the surrounding community.” The Core Value of Collegiality underlies the approach taken in the interactions that occur on the campus, whether they have been formally identified as “dialogues” or not. Another assumption is that “dialogue improves collective thinking.” The College has also adopted the Core Value of Inclusiveness (2.22), the idea that it is “a community that embraces diverse individuals; provides an accessible, supportive climate; and encourages a variety of perspectives and opinions.” As a result, the campus benefits from the collective thinking of individuals from diverse backgrounds and different ideas who are supported in the articulation of their positions. While many of the colloquia and retreats have featured the use of a facilitator, the vast majority of campus dialogues have not relied upon an outside agent but have depended on the campus’s own processes and values to reach the goals articulated by the concept of dialogue.

The College has committed itself to a process in which planning drives the budget. There is a strong belief in strengthening all relevant committees, constituencies, departments, divisions, and services. Planning and budget relies heavily on planning documents developed through dialogues and committee participation. These documents include: Educational Master Plan (2.14), Student Services Master Plan (2.15), Distance Education Plan (2.16), Student Equity Plan (2.17), Technology Plan (2.18), and Basic Skills Action Plan (2.19, 2.20). The Planning and Budget Committee recognized the need to and has now tied areas such as Student Learning Outcomes, Department Planning and Program Review (2.21), Campus Support Services Quality Review (2.10), Student Support Services Quality Review (2.9), and the Curriculum Committee process into the Planning and Budget process in order to improve institutional effectiveness (2.96). E. Distance Education Plan Dialogue: Cypress College offered its first course via the Internet during the Fall 1999 semester. By Fall 2008, nearly 150 online and over 15 hybrid courses were offered. The tremendous growth of the Distance Education (DE) Program is a direct result of the determination and dedication of the students, faculty, staff, and administration of the College. The Cypress College Strategic Plan 2008-2011, approved on October 23, 2008, set a goal for the development of a comprehensive Distance Education Plan that addresses standards for student and instructor proficiency, and identifies strategies to improve student success, retention, and persistence (2.13). The entire Cypress College community was invited to participate in its development. Four meetings for the development of the DE Plan structure and content were held. Conversations included analysis of strengths and weaknesses of distance education, generally, and at Cypress College, specifically. Individual team members completed “homework” between meetings, which included results of their research on specific sections of the plan, and written responses to, or summaries of, that research (2.16). The Distance Edu70

F. Inclusive and Pervasive Dialogue Encompassing all Constituencies:

In addition to the specific topics noted earlier, the curriculum process, course and program development, student success, retention, and persistence rates, technology planning, accreditation, and meeting of user groups associated with construction projects have also been focal points of campus dialogues.

Cypress College

pact on campus-wide planning and decision making (2.92).

Figure 1: Participation

The Cypress College Foundation has also had several planning retreats, and the Community Advisory Group (2.23) has been part of the dialogues in a variety of settings. District and campus policies and procedures are also discussed in an open process and with a sense of collegiality. The College President is committed to the concept of institutionalization of dialogue and has implemented it in a variety of forums. In addition to the normal interactions as are found in the President’s Advisory Cabinet, the primary participatory governance group on campus (2.24), dialogue is a capstone of the Management Team meetings (2.25), Leadership Team meetings (2.26), and a variety of other forums on campus. In keeping with the College’s Core Value of “Inclusiveness,” these efforts have expanded the participation of different segments of the campus community in the process of information gathering and decision making. Figure 1 shows participation in shared governance committees by constituency. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning has proven to be an important source of data and analysis necessary to support Strategic Planning, Department Planning and Program Review (2.21), Student Support Services Quality Review (2.8, 2.9), Campus Support Services Quality Review (2.10), and Planning and Budget. As more members of the campus community have become aware of the variety of information available, they have begun to play a larger and more informed role in the campus dialogue about improving student learning and overall institutional effectiveness. The most recent review by Institutional Research and Planning reveals that over 95% of the respondents believe Institutional Research and Planning had a positive imInstitutional Self Study — Spring 2011

The President and others on campus have made a conscious effort to engage all constituencies in the planning and institutional improvement dialogue. However, although invited to participate, not all individuals choose to participate in the dialogue. This is sometimes a matter of apathy or over-commitment in other areas by a faculty and staff burdened by ever-increasing workloads. Students, in particular, although encouraged to participate, are often difficult to include in the dialogue process because of their commitments and/ or a lack of awareness regarding the impact of their participation. As a consequence, the dialogue sometimes fails to involve as much participation as desired, or is not attended by as many individuals or constituencies to be fully characteristic of and as broadly based as a sharedgovernance process should be. Nonetheless, the College embraces and understands the purpose of the dialogue and has made great effort to reach the goal of institutionalizing that process in a variety of settings. The awareness, participation, effectiveness, and involvement in the planning process among constituency groups is shown in Figure 2. In addition to the opportunities already mentioned, opportunities for information sharing include the following documents and committees:

◊

Strategic Plan 2008-2011 (2.13)

◊

Educational Master Plan (2.14)

◊

Technology Plan (2.18)

Figure 2: Effectiveness of Planning Process: Climate Survey, Spring 2010

◊

Student Services Master Plan (2.15)

◊

CTE Advisory Committees (2.86)

◊

Matriculation Plan (2.28)

◊

College Colloquiums and Retreats (2.35)

◊

Distance Education Plan (2.16)

◊

Basic Skills Committee (2.19, 2.20)

◊

Basic Skills Plan (2.19)

◊

Distance Education Committee (2.16)

◊

Student Equity Plan (2.17)

◊

Cypress College Website (2.68, 2.69)

Workforce Development Committee (Grants) (2.90)

◊

@ Cypress (2.74)

◊

Opening Day (Fall & Spring)

◊

End-of-the-Year Reports (2.57, 2.58, 2.59, 2.60, 2.61)

◊

Campus Budget Meeting scheduled by Chancellor

◊

Institutional Effectiveness Reports (2.27, 2.42, 2.43, 2.44)

◊

Campus-wide Special Meeting for Budget Update

◊

Institutional Research and Planning Bulletins (2.72, 2.73)

◊

Foundation Strategic Plan (2.82)

◊

Academic Senate (2.78)

◊

Deans & Directors (2.83)

◊

Planning and Budget Committee (2.31, 2.40, 2.41, 2.67)

◊

Management Team (2.25)

◊

Leadership Team (2.26)

◊

Curriculum Committee – evaluate courses, programs, certificates, and degrees. (2.84)

◊

Division Meetings – Campus activities, initiatives, goals, programs, directions, opportunities, challenges, and barriers are discussed. (2.88)

◊

Department Meetings – faculty members revise SLOs, develop curriculum, and evaluate department goals (2.89)

◊

Department Planning and Program Review – Annual academic program review (2.21)

◊

Student Support Services Quality Review (2.8, 2.9)

◊

Campus Support Services Quality Review (2.10)

◊

President’s Advisory Cabinet (2.24)

◊

Staff Development (2.85)

Self Evaluation The variety of opportunities to engage in dialogue reflects the College’s commitment to an environment where participation, institutional effectiveness, and innovation are encouraged and embraced. Additionally, because of its commitment to both Core Values of Collegiality and Inclusiveness, Cypress College has engaged in dialogue on all essential issues but recognizes that it can always improve the breadth and depth of the dialogue as well as the level of participation. The College has succeeded in promoting dialogue among the groups described in this section, and members of the College community concur that they have an opportunity to participate in the planning process that they believe is effective (Figure 2) and that the goal of the dialogue is to work on improving student learning and institutional effectiveness.

Planning Agenda None. 2. The institution sets goals to improve its effectiveness consistent with its stated purposes. The institution articulates its goals and states the objectives derived from them in measurable terms so that the degree to which they are achieved can be determined and widely discussed. The institutional members understand these goals and work collaboratively toward their achievement.

Cypress College

Descriptive Summary Through a collective, collaborative process, Cypress College established its Strategic Plan with five clearly articulated Strategic Directions that reflect 13 goals and 37 strategies to accomplish those goals (2.13). The Strategic Plan for the period 2008-2011 was approved and adopted in Fall 2008. Some strategies are multiyear while others are single year. The 2008-2009 Institutional Effectiveness Report, Table 18, (2.27) lists all the goals and strategies and provides the status. The planning process and development of the Strategic Plan at Cypress College build on the strategic goals identified by the District. Beginning with the Educational Master Plan, the College has developed several plans to define the scope of activities in the critical areas of the institution. Collectively, these plans set out the operational context and intended direction of the institution. The accomplishment of these plan objectives individually and collectively reflects how well the institution is progressing towards its stated goals. Currently, the following plans have been approved and are being pursued institutionally:

◊

Educational Master Plan (2.14)

◊

Student Services Master Plan (2.15)

◊

Matriculation Plan (2.28)

◊

Distance Education Plan (2.16)

◊

Technology Plan (2.18)

◊

Basic Skills Plan (2.19)

◊

Student Equity Plan (2.17)

◊

Enrollment Management Plan (2.97)

The periods of these plans differ although all of them are being implemented concurrently and all influence the Strategic Plan. Each of the plans has specific and measurable goals and objectives and a timeframe for accomplishing them. The action plans are specific so that it is possible to assess the extent to which the goals have been achieved. The strategic goals are tied to the Mission and Vision Statements and Core Values of the College and ultimately to the student, program and institutional program learning outcomes. An update on the strategic plan goals was added in the current version of the Institutional Effectiveness Report (2.27) to provide the operational context of the institution. The actual plans can be obtained from the Office of InInstitutional Self Study — Spring 2011

stitutional Research and Planning and are referenced elsewhere in this document. The planning process at Cypress College is guided by the overall directions provided in the mission and Strategic Plan of the North Orange County Community College District. The institutional effectiveness perspective helps establish the relationship between the missions of the District and the College, the institutional learning outcomes, program learning outcomes, and the student learning outcomes established for individual departments and programs. Assessment results of student learning outcomes are used to evaluate accomplishment of the institutional mission, thereby establishing a cycle of institutional improvement based on clearly established goals and performance standards. The assessment outcomes are also used to drive the institutional dialogue of continuous quality improvement. The central theme of institutional effectiveness is built around student success. This is demonstrated through the multiple planning documents that collectively define what the short- and long-term goals of the College are, how the College allocates resources to provide the physical and academic infrastructure required for student learning, and how the goals align with the mission and vision of the North Orange County Community College District (NOCCCD) and those of the College. The Educational Master Plan sets the long-term goals of the institution; the Strategic Plan breaks them down into short-term goals and drives the annual planning and budget process. The objectives identify specific ways to strengthen institutional effectiveness within three-year cycles. Completing the objectives requires sustained and collaborative efforts by many at the College (2.29). Progress on the objectives is monitored annually by the Strategic Plan Direction Committees (2.30), Planning and Budget, President’s Advisory Cabinet, Academic Senate, and other campus constituencies. Figure 29 in the Institutional Effectiveness Report (2.27) illustrates the connections between the Educational Master Plan (2.14), Strategic Plan (2.13), and Planning and Budget Process (2.31, 2.31, 2.33, 2.34). In its Strategic Plan, Cypress College has articulated five Strategic Directions (2.13) as follows: Direction One: Instruction Designing, enhancing, and delivering comprehensive 73

and accessible instruction to promote academic excellence and student learning. Direction Two: Student and Academic Support Services Developing and providing comprehensive student and academic support services to foster a positive and effective learning environment. Direction Three: Campus Support and Infrastructure Ensuring that campus support services and resources are provided in an effective and efficient manner. Direction Four: Climate, Involvement, and Communication Promoting a campus climate that embraces diversity and supports excellence, integrity, collegiality, and inclusiveness, by supporting communication and involvement throughout the college. Direction Five: Collaborative Relations and Marketing Improving marketing efforts, and establishing and strengthening collaborative relationships with other educational institutions and with the communities we serve. The Strategic Plan also serves as a core document for annual discussions regarding the allocation of faculty positions, one-time funds, and other resources. For further insight into the role of the Strategic Plan relative to other college plans and processes, please see the Diagram of the Planning Process (2.31). Development of the 2008-2011 Strategic Plan The Strategic Plan was developed with extensive involvement of and understanding by all parts of the campus community. In March 2008, 50 members of Cypress College attended a strategic planning colloquium at the UCLA Conference Center in Lake Arrowhead (2.35). Participants included students, faculty, classified staff, and managers. In addition, colloquium participants had been at the College from as little as six months to more than 38 years and represented many different programs and departments. Please see Appendix B (Page 12) of the Strategic Plan for a complete list of colloquium participants (2.13). Prior to the colloquium, participants prepared statements about the most significant strengths at the College and 74

what needed most urgent attention. These statements were based upon a wide variety of resources including interviews of students and colleagues, and existing reports and plans (including the Educational Master Plan (2.14), the Student Services Master Plan (2.15), the NOCCCD District Strategic Plan (2.36), the Basic Skills Plan (2.19), Matriculation Plan (2.28), Distance Education Plan (2.16), Technology Plan (2.18), and recommendations to the College from the accrediting commission (2.37, 2.38, 2.39). This pre-colloquium assignment was designed to (1) solicit input from members of the College who were not able to attend the retreat and (2) connect the new Strategic Plan to significant work and plans underway at the College and District. At the colloquium, participants met in small and large groups to agree upon the primary challenges facing the College. These challenges soon fell into several broad topic areas: student success and retention, resource development, communication, campus involvement, training and orientation, and marketing. Participants then drafted strategies and objectives to address the six primary challenges. Towards the end of the colloquium, participants met as a large group to reflect upon their work and discuss implications and next steps. The group agreed that because the previous strategic directions (and some goals) were still considered to be relevant, the new Strategic Plan should keep a similar structure, with five strategic directions. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning provided demographic trend data for the service areas, helped to plan and coordinate the retreat, participated in the break-out sessions, and worked with volunteers on follow-up activities after the retreat. Scanning teams composed of individuals from a broad spectrum of College constituencies gathered and reflected upon information available from a wide variety of sources. At the Strategic Planning Colloquium, participants identified key trends likely to have significant impact on the future of the College. After the colloquium, objectives were compiled from the colloquium records to form the initial basis of a new plan. The direction statements were modified slightly to reflect the six primary challenges identified at the colloquium, and the new objectives were mapped to the five strategic directions. The next phase of developing the plan involved drafting over-arching goals and carrying previous goals forCypress College

ward, as appropriate. Portions of the draft plan were shared with campus groups for discussion in April 2008. For example, the Planning and Budget Committee reviewed the draft of Direction Three, and the 5% MORE Committee (now the Enrollment Management Committee) reviewed the draft of Direction Five. The entire draft plan was shared with the Leadership Team at its meeting on May 2, 2008 (2.26). Small group discussions at that meeting identified language that needed to be revised for clarity. In general, however, the suggested revisions made at that point were relatively minor. Suggested changes were incorporated as appropriate, and a revised draft of the Strategic Plan was presented to the Planning and Budget Committee on May 15, 2008 (2.40). The committee representatives asked for time to review the plans with their constituency groups before final approval but agreed to tentatively approve the plan pending potential additional feedback. This allowed work related to the plan to continue through Summer 2008. At the September 18, 2008, meeting of the Planning and Budget Committee the Strategic Plan was accepted as written and forwarded to the President’s Advisory Cabinet with a recommendation that it be adopted (2.41). That same day in the President’s Advisory Cabinet approval of the 2008-2011 Strategic Plan was finalized. Faculty, staff, students, administrators, and a community advisory group all took part in the development and revision of the Plan. The 2008-2011 Strategic Plan was organized around the five Directions cited, which reflect the importance to the College of learning and instruction, student success, campus climate and diversity, technology, efficient and effective use of physical, financial and human resources, and development of relationships with the external community. The Strategic Plan 2008-2011 reflects the significance of accountability: action plans are tied to specific Directions and goals, include a timeline, and a notation of the person(s) responsible. Each action plan includes a specific target statement, some of which include very specific improvement targets. The Strategic Plan Progress Reports (2.30) and annual Institutional Effectiveness Reports identify the extent of progress in specific areas (2.27, 2.42, 2.43, 2.44). Given the fact that Cypress College’s overarching Vision and Mission Statements are oriented towards student success, the extent to which the campus accomInstitutional Self Study — Spring 2011

plishes these must be the primary focus of assessment. Several benchmarks are utilized including those that indicate the College’s goals and the responses of the students themselves: Status of the Strategic Plan The assessment of the current status of the Strategic Plan was completed during Summer 2009 and is available in the Institutional Effectiveness Reports for review by members of the College community (2.27). Examination of the Report is an accurate means of determining the extent to which the College is progressing towards achievement of its goals. Results of the Student Satisfaction Survey: It is also important for the College to know students’ perceptions of their own needs and to assess whether or not improvement goals are being met. In the Fall of 2009, 14,701 students were surveyed, of which 1,847, or 12.6% responded. These respondents represented a cross-section of the College’s demographics. They completed electronic surveys distributed by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning which indicated what factors they found important in a college and their level of satisfaction at Cypress College (2.45). Twelve parameters covering a broad range of campus activities were measured. Students indicated they were pleased with the quality of instruction, admissions and registration, campus safety, academic advising, academic services, campus services, the variety of courses, and the adequacy of the Library, computer labs, and study areas. They also reported that faculty are knowledgeable in their fields and are available to students after class and during office hours. The areas where students reported dissatisfaction, such as availability of classes and a reduced class schedule, may be attributable to the heavy budget cuts experienced this year and in prior years. Compared to the same survey conducted in the Spring 2007 (2.46), students were significantly more satisfied in the areas of campus safety, academic services, admissions and financial aid, and climate. More importantly, they also noted the College’s commitment to underrepresented populations and to students with disabilities. A summary report of the Campus Climate and Student Satisfaction Survey was reviewed with all staff on Spring 2010 Opening Day, and the results were shared in detail with the Leadership Team. Complete survey results are available in the Office of Institutional Research and Plan75

ning (2.47). The campus budget process also reflects institutional commitment to achieving the College’s goals (2.31, 2.32, 2.33, 2.34). The process for reviewing and awarding one-time budget requests (generated at the Division/Department level) favors requests that help support the established directions and goals. The Strategic Plan Directions teams review budget requests relevant to their area, prioritize them, and make recommendations to the Planning and Budget Committee (2.48, 2.49). Please refer to budget process diagram (2.96). Although the process of developing the Strategic Plan in the past had some shortcomings, the campus has made significant improvements in the processes to address those concerns. Initially, many on campus did not fully recognize the linkages of planning activities to campus activities. As a result, participation on the Direction Committees had been limited to those who more quickly grasped the significance of that participation. The College recognized and successfully responded to the need to increase the campus awareness of the linkages between planning and other events and the need to increase participation in the process. The College has moved to a planning cycle (2.32, 2.33), which recognizes that the College’s Directions are expected to be fairly stable over time but that the process for establishing goals and action plans should be flexible enough to respond to changing conditions. Additionally, the older Strategic Plans were not wellinformed by external trends likely to impact the future of the College, so it was difficult to adapt to external changes and stay true to the Strategic Plan. This has been addressed by initiating a process to scan and forecast external factors that impact the goals of the College. Most personnel understand the College’s directions, goals, and objectives. The means of reaching those objectives is enhanced as more research and other data become available and are analyzed and formulated into understandable formats, such as the Institutional Effectiveness Dashboard (2.29). As a result, the College’s staff has a better sense of how those goals can be better achieved. Moreover, most individuals and constituencies understand the link between planning, program review, budget allocation, institutional effectiveness, and student success. That understanding has been advanced by the development of the College’s 76

Planning and Budget Guidelines (2.31, 2.32, 2.33, 2.34), which exist to assist Planning and Budget operationally, and individuals and constituencies in the budget request and allocation process, and the Principles for Budget Reductions, which assist divisions and departments in making thoughtful and effective budget reductions (2.53). Achieving the strategic goals is dependent upon staff sharing those goals and understanding the processes of decision making on campus. In a recently conducted Campus Climate Survey (2.47), over 80 percent of all survey respondents felt that “all of us” or “most of us” have a unified commitment to achieving the goal of student success. This sense of commitment did not differ by employee group. As a result of the flow of communication, the College community has a broad understanding of the planning process, the goals of the institution, and the processes used to implement them. Results from the Campus Climate and Planning Survey (2.47) conducted in Fall 2009 received a record 441 responses, up by nearly 30% over Spring 2008. The electronic survey was sent to the entire population of Cypress College faculty, staff, and managers (1,112 individuals). Although the survey attracted responses from different demographic groups, there was one notable change from previous response trends. A significantly large number of parttime employees participated in the survey this time (168 responses compared to 84 in Spring 2008). It is worth noting that in each of the planning-related questions, a large percentage of employees were “neutral” (neither agree nor disagree) in their opinion. Also, it is particularly noteworthy that administrators, faculty, and staff report being more knowledgeable about the campus planning process than in the prior Campus Climate Surveys (2.54, 2.55, 2.56, Figure 2). There was a significant increase in the number of adjunct faculty participating in the survey in Fall 2009 compared with Spring 2008. Since the adjunct faculty are present on the campus for a limited period of time, their opportunity and motivation to participate in campus activities are restricted compared to those who are on campus full time. This fact was noted while analyzing the results. The comparisons with prior periods were made after controlling for the response of the adjunct. The higher response from adjuncts helped to better understand issues that they face.

Cypress College

Knowledgeable about planning process

Know how to participate

Participate

Participation influences outcome

Encouraged to participate

Administrators

89.3

85.7

88.9

Faculty

59.1

53.9

45.8

30.6

55.2

Classified Staff

63.2

42.9

32.7

25.7

49.5

Table 1: Awareness, participation, and perception of planning process

On the issues of Decision Making, General Job Satisfaction & Planning, administrators, faculty and staff members reported a broad awareness of the College’s strategic goals and the planning process, and believe that their contributions are influential. Administrators were most likely to agree that they are aware and involved in campus planning, while part-time faculty were least likely to agree. There was a new section in the survey on effectiveness of the planning process. The employees were asked about their awareness, participation, effectiveness, and perception of the campus planning activities. Overall, the full-time employees are aware of the planning process and know how to participate. Certain employee groups feel more strongly than others that their participation influences the planning process. The survey indicates that the majority of managers, faculty, and staff are knowledgeable about the planning process, as shown in Table 1. The percentage of the faculty reporting their familiarity with the planning process is influenced by the large number of less-knowledgeable part-time faculty participating in the survey. Neutral responses were indicated by 10.7, 24.0, and 28.3 percent, respectively. The majority of managers, faculty, and staff indicated that they knew how to participate in the planning process. Neutral responses were indicated by 10.7, 25.6, and 42.9 percent, respectively. The majority of managers, faculty, and staff indicated that they actually participate in the planning process. Neutral responses were indicated by 10.7, 25.9, and 42.1 percent, respectively. On the question of whether participation influences the outcome of the planning process, managers, faculty, and staff believed it did. Neutral responses of 3.7, 41.1, and 49.5 percent, respectively, were reported. When asked if they are encouraged to participate in the planning process, a majority of managers, faculty, and staff strongly agreed or agreed. Neutral responses were indicated by 7.4, 25.5, Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

and 36.4 percent, respectively. The information was reviewed during the Leadership Team meeting where the teams proposed strategies to improve engagement in the planning process. Members of the College community not only have an understanding of the planning process, the College’s goals, and work together to achieve those goals, they believe the planning process leads to achievement of those goals. Perhaps the most important of the questions on the Campus Climate and Planning Survey was, “I think the planning process helps the college achieve its desired goals.” In response to this question, the majority of all employee groups — managers (92.9%), faculty (57.9%), and staff (58.3%) — strongly agreed or agreed. Neutral responses were received from managers (7.1%), faculty (30.3%), and staff (36.1%). Faculty, staff, and managers are encouraged to be creative and innovative in achieving the College’s goals and report that they work together for the common good of the College. The majority of managers, faculty, and staff report that they collaborate with other divisions and departments to achieve the College’s strategic goals. Clearly, the campus has a broad understanding of the College’s planning process, the goals, and the possible means of working to achieve those goals, and that the institution is committed to achieving its identified goals. All managers are required to include activities in support of the College’s strategic goals from the Directions in their individual annual performance goals and objectives. Direction teams meet annually or more frequently, as needed, to review and report on the progress towards each of the goals in their Direction area. This review and status report process forms the basis for reports to the campus and the Board of Trustees regarding the completion of the College’s goals, as evidenced by the annual Institutional Effectiveness Reports (2.57, 77

2.58, 2.59, 2.60, 2.61).

ning as a priority at Cypress College.

Self Evaluation

Planning Agenda

As evidenced by the Campus Climate and Planning Survey and the long list of accomplishments identified in the Institutional Effectiveness Reports (2.27, 2.42, 2.43, 2.44), the completion of new buildings, growth of online education, integration of online registration and support services, and articulation and communication of the planning process and goals in a variety of formats, the College has a broad-based understanding of the goals and great success in achieving them. The Institutional Effectiveness Report has provided two categories of information: (1) a consistent set of information on college demographics and program review, and (2) special segments that summarize important activities that were initiated or completed during the period of review, such as Campus Survey Results and Student Learning Outcomes. The consistent information enables comparison of institutional performance over a period of time by using the trend data on the same parameters. The special segments provide an overview of the specific activities relevant to institutional effectiveness. This past year, apart from continuing to maintain the trend information and special segments, two chapters were added to bring specific focus to institutional effectiveness with respect to the changing academic environment; specifically, the Dashboard of Institutional Effectiveness and Comprehensive Planning Process (2.29, 2.62, 2.63). As the College grows, the need for on-going communication and processes to engage new faculty, staff, and managers will continue. As SLOs at the course, program and institutional level continue to be used and refined, opportunities to develop additional and expanded strategic goals will continue into the future.

None.

Through an organized and comprehensive process of planning, goal setting, communication, dialogue, review, assessment, and revision to refine its key processes and improvement strategies, the College engages in sustainable and continuous quality improvement. There is an on-going positive dialogue at all levels at the College about institutional effectiveness wherein data and analyses are widely distributed and discussed and further input received. As recognized by faculty, staff, and administration, this translates to a consistent and continuous commitment to improving institutional effectiveness and demonstrates the importance of plan78

3. The institution assesses progress toward achieving its stated goals and makes decisions regarding the improvement of institutional effectiveness in an ongoing and systematic cycle of evaluation, integrated planning, resource allocation, implementation, and re-evaluation. Evaluation is based on analyses of both quantitative and qualitative data.

Descriptive Summary Ongoing planning is something that is taken very seriously at Cypress College. So much so that in early 2009, the Director of Institutional Research position was restructured to include planning. As a result, that position now directly reports to the President and also serves as a member of the Presidentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s staff, which also includes the Executive Vice President of Educational Programs and Services and the Vice President of Administrative Services. This significant change illustrates that planning is at the forefront of student success at Cypress College. The planning process at Cypress College focuses on institutional effectiveness in order to achieve the ultimate outcome: student success. The cycle of institutional effectiveness begins with the aligned missions of the North Orange County Community College District (NOCCCD) and Cypress College. These missions drive the strategic goals and objectives set forth by the College. Student learning outcomes are then established for individual areas and then assessed to see if the College has made any progress in achieving its mission. These outcomes help to drive an ongoing dialogue about continuous quality improvement (2.64). The planning process itself utilizes a variety of different documents that define the short- and long-term goals of the College along with how the College allocates its resources to fulfill its mission and vision to bring about student success (2.65). The NOCCCD Strategic Plan Framework (2.36) of Innovation, Collaboration, and Effectiveness helps drive the College Educational Master Plan (2.14). The Educational Master Plan sets the long-term goals of the College and helps drive planCypress College

ning in other specialized areas such as Student Services (2.15), Matriculation (2.28), Distance Education (2.16), Student Equity (2.17), Technology (2.18), and Basic Skills (2.19). The Cypress College Strategic Plan (2.13) then breaks down all of these areas into short-term goals and steers the annual planning and budget process. These strategic plan outcomes are documented in the Institutional Effectiveness Report and are reported to the Board of Trustees by the President each November (2.66). Once that takes place, the information is disseminated campus-wide through a variety of forums such as the Management Team (2.25), the Leadership Team (2.26), which includes representatives from all areas throughout the College, Department and Division Meetings, Deans Meetings, various shared-governance committees (2.67), as well as the College website (2.68, 2.69). The fiscal allocation process begins once a series of continuous reviews takes place. These reviews include the assessment of student learning outcomes, a variety of institutional effectiveness measures contained in the Institutional Effectiveness Report, departmental curriculum review, and several areas of quality review. All areas of quality review include both quantitative (enrollment, outcomes, etc.) and qualitative data (faculty and/or student surveys). Department Planning and Program Review (instructional quality review) takes place on a three-year rotation with one third of the programs participating each Fall. This process is continuously improving with the Program Review Committee recommending and the Academic Senate approving revisions to the review, such as to now include fiscal allocations and student learning outcomes for a more comprehensive assessment of a department’s performance (2.21, 2.70). Student Services Quality Review takes place on a four-year rotation with onefourth of the programs participating each Fall. This process has also been improved. After a review by the Institutional Effectiveness Task Force and the Student Services Council, a decision was made to include program level information about faculty/staff involvement and needs assessment, facilities, technology, and fiscal resources and planning into the quality review to meet ACCJC standards of assessment and planning. Campus Support Services Quality Review takes place in the Spring semester every three years. This process is also being revamped to make it more in line with both instructional and student services program review. The Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

most recent round of Campus Support Services Quality review took place in Spring 2010 (2.92 ). Beginning in Spring 2008, a review was piloted for special programs on campus that receive one-time funding allocations; however, the future schedule of this process is yet to be determined (2.71). Once all of these reviews are complete, the information is ready for the Planning and Budget Committee (PBC). This is a shared-governance committee comprised of faculty, administration, classified staff, and students. Its charge is to direct the planning effort, complete the annual planning and budget processes — which includes faculty positions (2.50), classified staff needs (2.51), facilities projects (2.52) and one-time budget allocations (2.48) — and make appropriate recommendations to PAC for final consideration, discussion, and approval. For example, the one-time budget allocation process requires those seeking funding to tie their request to either the Educational Master Plan or the Student Services Master Plan. Also, each request must specify what goal the budget request would support and how each goal supports the College strategic directions and goals set forth in the Strategic Plan. Once this is completed, each request is assessed by a Direction Committee, which looks at whether it supports the College mission, if an area is growing, the quality of the area, the demonstrated need, and if safety issues are involved (2.48, 2.49). The committees rank the requests and present their recommendations to Planning and Budget where the requests are prioritized into one list and presented to PAC for final approval (2.98).

Self Evaluation Since the last accreditation visit, the amount of datadriven decision making has increased. The Institutional Effectiveness Report (IER), established in 20042005, serves as the primary document assessing how well the College is doing in achieving student success. The IER, for the first-time in 2008-2009, now includes a dashboard, which examines a variety of measures related to student success for each of the five directions of the strategic plan. The resources section also provides a complete listing of other information provided to inform planning. In the most recent Institutional Research Campus Services Quality Review, conducted in Spring 2010, 97% of respondents “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that information received from Institutional 79

Research is easy to understand, and 97% of respondents “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that Institutional Research data have had a positive impact on planning, and, 95% “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that Institutional Research data have had a positive impact on decision making at Cypress College (2.91). The College uses a variety of planning processes to ensure that data-driven decision making is taking place, and budget allocations are linked to College planning. While this is currently happening in instruction and student services, additional work needs to be completed in the areas of assessing campus services and special programs to make sure that funding in these areas are similarly allocated based on the College mission.

Planning Agenda None. 4. The institution provides evidence that the planning process is broad-based, offers opportunities for input by appropriate constituencies, allocates necessary resources, and leads to improvement of institutional effectiveness.

Descriptive Summary At Cypress College, the shared-governance process is a system whereby all affected persons have an opportunity to give input into decision making, directly or through representation in all planning, budget, off-site planning colloquia, and other collegial consultation committees. For example, one important committee is the President’s Advisory Cabinet (PAC), which serves as the primary recommending body to the College president on the establishment of campus policies, procedures, and general college issues. PAC includes President’s Staff and representatives from the College’s main constituent groups. The Academic Senate represents the faculty on academic and professional matters as defined in Title 5 of the California Education Code on Strengthening Academic Senates. The United Faculty (UF) represents the faculty on wages, hours, working conditions, and contractual matters. The California School Employees Association (CSEA) represents the classified staff on wages, hours, working conditions, and contractual matters. The District Management Association (DMA) represents Cypress College managers and their views regarding affected areas in deliberating and formulating decisions. Students are represented by 80

the Associated Students (AS) and have rights as defined by Title 5. Broad involvement in the College planning process is guaranteed by the shared-governance policy that functions in accordance with (1) the mandates of AB 1725, the California Education Code, and Title 5 regulations, (2) the collective bargaining agreements with the UF, (3) the policies of the Board of Governors, and (4) the policies and procedures of the North Orange County Community College District Board of Trustees to ensure that these groups are represented in the planning process. A strong collegial atmosphere and a shared vision and commitment to student success generates the interest of administration, faculty, staff, and students to participate and follow the above policies. A recent campus survey (2.47) provides evidence that there are recognized opportunities for broad-based participation in a successful planning process. The majority of managers (89.3%), faculty (59.1%), and staff (63.2%) either agree or strongly agree that they are aware of the planning process. The majority of managers (92.9%), faculty (57.9%), and staff (58.3%) either agree or strongly agree that the planning process helps the College achieve its desired goals. The majority of managers (89.3%) and faculty (53.9%), but only 42.9% of staff either agree or strongly agree that they know how to participate in the planning process. As referenced in earlier portions of this report, the College President and others have made a conscious effort to engage all constituencies in the planning process relating to institutional improvement. However, although invited to participate, students, staff, and faculty may not participate in this process for reasons ranging from apathy to over-commitment. As a result, the campus process may represent views from a smaller segment of the campus community than desired. The Leadership Team engaged in developing strategies to improve participation and transparency in planning and decisionmaking processes to further improve on this area. Goal 9 and Assessments 23 & 24 under Direction Four of the Strategic Plan were established to further guarantee broad involvement in College activities, including the planning process: Goal 9: Expand involvement in College activities, plans and initiatives to reflect broader participation by all members of the College. Assessment 23: By Fall 2008, establish a task force Cypress College

on campus involvement to explore and establish strategies and activities to increase involvement and to identify the responsible individuals or departments to lead these efforts (e.g., a written guide to campus involvement, spirit week, and student life activities plan). Lead Person: Chair of Direction Four. Assessment 24: By Fall 2010, reflect upon the recent strategies to increase campus involvement and develop ways to sustain or expand the most effective ones. Lead Person: Chair of Task Force on Campus Involvement. Involvement is also further enhanced by allowing different individuals from the various constituency groups the opportunity to participate on a variety of shared governance committees. This allows for each constituency group to determine if somebody with past experience is best suited to meet the needs of the group or if it is better to rotate to a new individual who can bring fresh new ideas and a new perspective. Each group sets forth the ground rules on when and how their representation will be reviewed. The College allocates resources — to the extent resources are available — in accordance with established plans and procedures. Program and quality reviews are incorporated as part of the allocation process whenever requests for funding are considered. Allocations are monitored and reviewed to assure that College dollars are being allocated and effectively expended in accord with identified priorities. The College has an effective resource allocation process to continuously identify and access outside resources wherever possible. By way of example, the College secured a Department of Education STEM grant totaling $2.5 million for modernizing laboratory instructional equipment, multimedia upgrades for lecture and laboratory instruction, outreach, tutoring services, and collaborative student research projects with local universities. The District has also been able to pass a local general obligation bond Measure X for major building construction and upgrades to existing buildings. Corporate sponsorships with entities such as Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc., Volvo Penta, Sherwin-Williams, Snap-On, Matco, AAA, TurboCor, Yamaha Corporation, and many others support various programs at the College by providing instructional materials, equipment, and supplies. The Cypress College Foundation supports department Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

grants, equipment purchases, faculty mini-grants, student scholarships, and student emergency relief funds. The College has also developed relationships with numerous hospitals and facilities in support of instruction in Nursing and the allied health professions. The Nursing Program conducted a POD drill with the Orange County Public Health Dept. and local police and fire authorities. An aditional drill is in planning stages for November 2010. Nursing students conduct flu clinics each semester on campus as well as in senior centers and local hospitals. Pediatric nursing students do developmental assessments for Orange County Childrens’ Services each December, visit local grade schools to talk about nursing, and do a “show and tell” for Cypress College’s KinderCaminata each year. In addition, the California Nursing Student Association (CSNA) sponsors Toys for Tots every December, conducts a job fair on campus each semester with local hospitals, military, and Veterans Hospitals participating. and participates in outreach to high schools. The Dental Hygiene Program has contracts with Share Ourselves Clinic in Costa Mesa and Rancho Los Amigos in Downey. These facilities allow dental students to go to each facility for training. The Hotel, Restaurant, Culinary Arts Program receives support from Disney Resorts, Knott’s Berry Farm, the Hotel Industry Association, numerous hotels, and other entities. The College also generates $1.2 million in unrestricted funding annually by renting space to a weekend swap meet. With regard to enrollment, as the College has reduced budgets, resources have been allocated based upon the implementation of effective plans. These plans addressed issues of FTES reduction and resource allocation. The information considered in making these reductions and allocating resources included:

◊

Unmet student demand reports

◊

Unfilled seat reports

◊

Five year enrollment trend reports

◊

Program review reports

◊

College Educational Master Plan

The result has been a significant reduction in expenditures and seats available, at a time of significant increases in student demand, increased fill rates, and FTES. When resources to fulfill plans and meet the College’s goals are reduced, the College follows prescribed bud81

get reduction guidelines, incorporates strategies for effective class scheduling reductions â&#x20AC;&#x201D; while preserving the integrity of programs â&#x20AC;&#x201D; and seeks alternatives to improve productivity and efficiency. Effective planning has led to some positive changes during this economic downturn and time of uncertainty. The College has successfully completed three new major facilities and four significant remodels because it had appropriate and effectively developed plans in place to capture the Stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s scarce available resources. Finally, program quality is significantly supported by the engagement of a funding process that provides for the consideration of both short-term and long-term goals. Significant one-time program needs are addressed through a rigorous one-time funding process that funded significant improvements and upgraded equipment and support for a variety of programs. Unexpected needs and/or emergencies are also addressed by Planning and Budget on an ad hoc basis as the need arises through a special or emergency funding request process.

Self Evaluation Planning and decision making is broad based and participatory throughout the College. All shared-governance committees allow for participation from each of the various constituency groups on campus. Awareness and recruitment by each of these groups allows for opportunity and assures that involvement is broad within each constituency group. The College allocates resources through an extensive planning process that allows for the inclusion of data-driven decision making. The College also uses this information to set priorities and determine whether efficiencies can be obtained locally to increase resources or funding should be sought out from external bodies such as through grants and/or corporate sponsorships. The planning process has allowed the College to make necessary changes to update facilities and programs to better meet the needs of its student population.

Planning Agenda None. 5. The institution uses documented assessment results to communicate matters of quality assurance to appropriate constituencies. 82

Descriptive Summary Cypress College collects, analyzes, and disseminates a variety of student assessment and quality assurance data. It utilizes a variety of means to communicate information pertaining to student achievement to a wide variety of different groups. The reports integrate a range of quantitative and qualitative assessment. Apart from the college-wide reports such as success and retention, program-specific reports are also developed. Examples of program-specific reports include effectiveness of Supplementary Instruction and Improvement in successive basic skills mathematics courses. Among the means that are used to communicate matters of quality assurance are the annual Institutional Effectiveness Reports (2.27, 2.42, 2.43, 2.44) and End-ofthe-Year Reports (2.57, 2.58, 2.59, 2.60, 2.61). Further information about institutional effectiveness is found in a variety of detailed research data and reports disseminated by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning (2.68, 2.72, 2.73). In addition, the office analyzes, synthesizes, and presents information in a manner that is readily understood by the College community. Research reports are usually presented to audiences in person by the Director. This provides the Director with the opportunity to observe how well the material meets the expectations of the audience and whether it provides appropriate detail. It allows the Director to assess how it is interpreted and likely to be used and gives the audience members the chance to ask questions or request further information. In the Spring 2010 survey of Institutional Research and Planning, 97% of respondents said that reports are easy to understand, and 98% said that researchers are open to feedback. While these exchanges are valuable and have improved significantly over the past several years, they are timeconsuming, and this approach leaves room for continued improvement. Often, the primary audience consists of one or more committees such as Planning and Budget, the Management Team, Leadership Team, or Deans and Directors Team. Although some committee members share the research with others, in years past, the information sometimes never reached the broader campus community. The College has worked at making significant improvements over the past five years in the sharing of information, which is corroborated by the Fall 2009 Campus Climate Survey (2.47). They include, among others, dissemination of such information on the College website (2.69), within the Cypress College

@Cypress newsletter (2.74), via Institutional Research and Planning Bulletins (2.72), Opening Day in Fall and Spring, and through a variety of other research surveys and reports (2.73). In some cases, comprehensive written reports are prepared and distributed campuswide. Other means used to communicate the status of student success are regular reports to the Board of Trustees, news releases, website postings, meetings with community advisory boards and career technical advisory committees, outreach counseling, reports to the College Foundation, and program publications and brochures from a number of campus areas. Since 1990, Cypress College has had a comprehensive instructional program review process in place. This is “Department Planning and Program Review,” formerly, “Instructional Quality Assessment” (2.21). With substantial changes on campus, as well as changes in the Accreditation Standards, in addition to the foregoing, the campus developed both a Student Services Quality Review (2.8) and a Campus Support Services Quality Review process (2.92). Both reviews are providing valuable information, establishing and monitoring goals, and evaluating and reporting effectiveness on a regular basis. Department Planning and Program Review, Student Services Quality Review, and Campus Support Services Quality Review reports are communicated to appropriate constituencies as part of their self-study processes. While the Department Planning and Program Review results are shared with those in the department, these results are also available for review by anyone wishing to examine them. The Student Services Quality Review and Campus Support Services Quality Review results are used for setting goals and program improvement and are shared campus-wide via allusers email and then stored on the J: drive for campus-wide access. In addition, the campus regularly reviews the effectiveness of the Strategic Plan. At the conclusion of each four-year cycle, a planning retreat or colloquium (2.35) is held to lay the groundwork for the development of the succeeding plan. In this process, the Department Planning and Program Review reports, Student Services Quality Review and Campus Support Services Quality Review reports, and a variety of other campus documents are evaluated so that the Strategic Plan is responsive to them. An external scan of factors impactInstitutional Self Study — Spring 2011

ing planning is also conducted. Each semester, the Office of Institutional Research and Planning publishes and distributes its Institutional Research and Planning Bulletins (2.72) that highlight enrollments, demographics, and a variety of other sound, action-oriented research to help decision-makers to act effectively on behalf of students and the community and to foster student success and institutional effectiveness. Externally, the Public Information Office publishes some of the more global achievements of the College’s students and faculty in a variety of media, including traditional publications and electronic media. It also builds rapport with the community, promotes Cypress College, and publishes basic transfer and completion rates and information regarding degrees and certificates awarded. While some data have always been published as part of the required “Student Right to Know” Report (2.75), the College only recently began publishing extensive or comprehensive statistics on student achievement and learning in the Institutional Effectiveness Report (2.27), which is accessible to the community and demonstrates the many contributions Cypress College makes. Finally, the Public Information Office publishes “@ Cypress,” a weekly publication to students, faculty, staff, administration, and the community that focuses on achievements of the College, students, faculty, staff and administration. This publication routinely contains demographic data and student success information (2.74). The College assesses whether it is effectively communicating information about institutional quality to the public through a variety of different means. On an asneeded basis, surveys are conducted to determine if its marketing efforts are effective. This was last done in Spring 2005 to determine the best ways to get information about Cypress College to the public (2.93). During that same time, the Public Information Office initiated a comprehensive communications program focused on connecting with students via email. Over time, these messages have become more sophisticated and are now segmented so that they contain information relevant to the individual student receiving them. For example, students enrolled in 9 units receive a personalized message encouraging them to add an additional class so that they can become a full-time student. This strate83

gic communication has also been utilized to encourage students who may be at or nearing eligibility for earning a degree or a certificate to meet with a counselor. In recent years, Cypress College has taken a proactive and leading role in the use of social media to communicate about the College’s success, including the success of its students, faculty, and alumni. During the period between accreditation visits, the College has utilized a variety of social media methods, including Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, iTunes, Podcasts, and MySpace. The focus of these endeavors has primarily been to convey information that fosters student success and student participation as well as highlighting the success of students, faculty, and alumni. A blog, launched in Fall 2010, furthers this effort. The College is always reviewing how it disseminates information to the public. For the first time this past year, the College developed a four-page document called the Dashboard of Institutional Effectiveness. This serves as a companion piece to the Institutional Effectiveness Report. It gives a quick snapshot on how well the College is performing on a variety of measures tied to the Strategic Plan Directions (2.29). It has been well received by the Board of Trustees and community groups. Cypress College also understands the importance of communicating and connecting with other educational entities. Specifically, the College works closely with the School of Continuing Education (SCE) to promote each other’s programs. This has lead to increasing numbers of SCE high school graduate program students enrolling at the College. The College also collaborates with local high schools regarding a wide variety of academic and vocational course offerings. All College managers are assigned to the ten local chambers of commerce from the College’s service area and special populations. The College also invites the community on campus to participate in various events such as KinderCaminata, Senior Day, and the High School Principals’ Breakfast. Despite the economic downturn, College enrollment is up, and College-sponsored community events like the Foundation Golf Tournament and Americana Awards continue to thrive. Cypress College makes a point of having a presence in the community and letting them know how well it is contributing to student success (2.94). Finally, several advisory committees comprising of 84

industry, business, labor union, civic, and community representatives meet to provide the College with information and to provide opportunities for the College to inform them and receive feedback assessing the College’s effectiveness. Current advisory committees include the following:

◊

Management Advisory Committee

◊

Marketing Advisory Committee

◊

Accounting Advisory Committee

◊

Computer Information Systems Advisory Committee

◊

Court Reporting Advisory Committee

◊

Automotive Technology Advisory Committee

◊

T-TEN Advisory Committee

◊

Automotive Collision Repair Advisory Committee

◊

Aviation Advisory Committee

◊

Airline Travel Careers Advisory Committee

◊

Hotel Restaurant Culinary Advisory Committee

◊

Air Conditioning & Refrigeration Advisory Committee

◊

Nursing Advisory Committee

◊

Dental Hygiene Advisory Committee

◊

Dental Assistant Advisory Committee

◊

Diagnostic Medical Sonography Advisory Committee

◊

Mortuary Science Advisory Committee

◊

Psychiatric Technology Advisory Committee

◊

Radiologic Technology Advisory Committee

◊

Health Information Technology Advisory Committee

◊

Art - Computer Graphics Advisory Committee

◊

Communications/Journalism Advisory Committee Cypress College

◊

Photography Advisory Committee

◊

Human Services Advisory Committee

Self Evaluation The College collects a variety of data used to assess whether it’s doing a successful job of achieving student success. The College has done a much better job in the last few years in disseminating this information to a variety of audiences on campus, off campus, and through the Internet. The College continually reviews whether the dissemination of information is working well or whether changes need to occur. Through these methods, matters of quality assurance and institutional effectiveness are communicated to the public. Given the high number of local community members choosing the College, these strategies appear to be working.

Planning Agenda None. 6. The institution assures the effectiveness of its ongoing planning and resource allocation processes by systematically reviewing and modifying, as appropriate, all parts of the cycle, including institutional and other research efforts.

Descriptive Summary The College uses several processes to evaluate the effectiveness of evaluations, integration of planning efforts, and budget allocation. The College’s institutional effectiveness cycle serves as a comprehensive model to assess, summarize, and report how well the College is doing with respect to its goals and objectives to ensure that they are relevant and being achieved in an appropriate timeline. All components of these processes — including Strategic Plan goals and objectives, student learning outcomes, and validation of mission fulfillment — serve as an effective process that drives the institutional dialogue of continuous quality improvement. For a number of years, the College has developed and used a Strategic Plan to effectively guide decision making and resource allocation. In addition, the NOCCCD Board of Trustees approved a district-wide Master Plan in 1999, which has been used to guide facilities development on the campus. It was not until 2006 that the Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

College developed its Educational Master Plan 20062016 that provides direction for each department and for the College as a whole (2.14). This was done partly in response to recommendations of the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges and partly because it was a tool recognized by the College as important to planning, budget allocation, evaluation, and continuous quality improvement. The College launched an ambitious project to develop the Educational Master Plan 2006-2016 during the 2005-2006 academic year. The strength of the plan lies in the fact that the faculty, staff, and management in each division and department developed their section, following a template established by the task force and responding to a broad array of data provided by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning. This grass-roots effort resulted in a plan that is based on real needs and, therefore, will be a valuable resource as the College moves forward. This Educational Master Plan has become the foundation on which all other College planning is based. It drives the development of future strategic plans and is operationalized through the goals and objectives that become part of the Strategic Plans. It is also used as decisions are made about resource allocations, including new faculty and staff, facilities, and budgets. Another piece of the ongoing planning process is the College’s Strategic Plan. Since 1996, the College has been using a four-year Strategic Plan. Each year, this plan has become more significant in guiding campus decision making. The culture of this institution in planning has always been to involve representatives from all constituencies in an all-day retreat to develop the ideas for the College’s Strategic Plan. The current plan used a consultative approach involving 50 faculty, staff, and administrators in a colloquium. The participants reviewed and updated the Vision and Mission of the College, reviewed the Core Values for the institution, considered community demographics and data supplied by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning, performed internal and external scans, and reviewed the status and effectiveness of the previous Strategic Plan as part of a systematic cycle of evaluation. It also involved the analysis of a variety of other planning documents including academic program reviews, noninstructional program reviews, research reports, and 85

the various campus plans referenced below.

decisions.

In addition to the review of individual planning processes and their integration with budget allocation, the College also conducts a systematic and comprehensive review of the planning processes, including evaluation of mechanisms for reviewing the effectiveness of the planning process at Cypress College. As part of this process, the campus community is asked to evaluate the adequacy of research data for all planning purposes.

In an effort to provide a more efficient way to evaluate its efforts and progress, in Fall 2005, several reports were combined together into one document, called the Institutional Effectiveness Report (2.42). Chapter one included student and staff data, chapter two included the summaries for the Department Planning and Program Reviews, chapter three and four included summaries for the Student Services Quality Reviews and the Campus Support Quality Reviews, and chapter five included a status report of the Strategic Plan. This document is produced and distributed each Fall in order for the campus to have a summary of its effectiveness and to act as an additional resource for continuous evaluation, planning, and responsible budget allocation. The document has continually evolved to now include chapters on a dashboard of institutional effectiveness, special programs quality review, student learning outcomes, and planning in general.

Each of the five directions in the Strategic Plan is monitored by a direction committee and headed up by a direction leader who is part of the Planning and Budget Committee (PBC). There are over forty individuals, including students, who work on the plan each year. In the Fall semester, PBC focuses on planning by communicating with those responsible for completing the action plans and developing a progress report in December. A final report of the action plans is completed in June. In the Spring, requests for one-time funding are prepared, and it is the direction committees that prioritize the requests based upon the goals and objectives of that part of the Strategic Plan. Those prioritizations are then discussed in PBC and merged into one list for the campus and presented to PAC for final approval. During the last two years, those submitting a request have also been required to submit their completed quality review report to identify why a particular request is being submitted. The evaluation form used by the direction committees to rank requests gives points for specific criteria including if the request is part of a plan developed through the quality review process. Other parts of the comprehensive planning process in existence are the various quality review processes. The College has used Department Planning and Program Review (formerly Instructional Quality Assessment or IQA) for 19 years as its program review process for instruction. The College has also initiated Student Services Quality Review and Campus Support Services Quality Review. All of these quality review processes are cyclical, thus providing the vehicle for continuous evaluation and assessment. The processes have and will continue to undergo continuous improvement, and the cycle is now repeating these processes, and has been integrated into campus decision making. The quality review reports have continuously gained importance among the constituents because they are being used by the College to help make 86

The Educational Master Plan (EMP), which covers a ten-year period, has become the umbrella for other College plans. The Technology Plan, the Student Equity Plan, the Facilities Plan, the Matriculation Plan, and the Distance Education Plan all support the EMP. Each of these plans is systematically reviewed and modified, as appropriate, to ensure continuous quality improvement. Most importantly, the EMP focuses the directions of the Strategic Plan, which is revised every four years; and the action plans, which are revised every two years. Since the Strategic Plan is so much a part of the culture of Cypress College, it is the vehicle to guide short-term decision making including resource allocation. Standardized data and measurable outcomes have been established. Measures of institutional effectiveness that relate to the College mission and the directions/goals of the Strategic Plan have been established. College performance on these measures is published annually in the Institutional Effectiveness Report. The Educational Master Plan has proven to be a valuable tool as it is used to set priorities for human resources and budget allocations. Department Planning and Program Review (2.21) reviews each departmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s curriculum/programs, goals and objectives on a 3-year rotation. The Career Technical Education programs follow a bi-yearly program review cycle. This provides a systematic review of the Cypress College

progress on goals since the previous review cycle. Integrated within Department Planning and Program Review is the SLO process, which is established to ensure that students are achieving learning outcomes of courses and programs. SLOs and PLOs are defined, and corresponding data is collected and analyzed for implementing an action plan. The effectiveness of the SLO process will be evaluated and assessed once the first cycle is completed by Spring of 2011. Department Planning and Program Review is also linked to the budget process. Budget requests from divisions must have a Strategic Plan Direction and a division, department, or program priority number assigned following faculty, staff, and management collaboration within that division, department or program. Budget items move from Direction Subcommittees to the Planning and Budget Committee where a priority list is created and presented to the President’s Advisory Cabinet for final approval. As funds become available, the priority list is used to fund the budget requests. The College’s Program Review form (2.21) has been updated to reflect the needs of the institution, including SLOs and linking resource needs. The Institutional Effectiveness Report (2.27) reviews and reports on the effectiveness of the program. Student Services is another area that reviewed its planning and resource allocation process following the adoption of the Educational Master Plan (EMP) (2.14) in 2006. The Student Services division formed a task force for development of SLOs for all Student Service areas. In 2007, the Student Services Master Plan (SSMP) (2.15) was completed. The driving force for developing the SSMP was to help students achieve their educational and/or occupational goals. This comprehensive support services and guidance plan was developed as a tool to help students overcome challenges as they arise. The SSMP, which covers a seven-year period, supports the Educational Master Plan and will be used for strategic planning in the Student Services divisions. Review of this process is ongoing. As indicated earlier in Standard IB, the campus regularly reviews the effectiveness of the Strategic Plan. During its four-year cycle, the Plan is annually reviewed by the Planning and Budget Committee and a variety of constituencies across campus, and adjustments are made in preparation for the following year. Campus Support Services reviews and evaluates each Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

program on a three-year cycle. The process was just updated to include more information about achieving previous goals, developing administrative unit outcomes (AUOs), as well as determining the impact on services in light of current economic uncertainties (2.92). The planning process does an effective job of fostering improvement. Specific elements within the institutional effectiveness cycle allow for continuous improvement in accord with articulated and identified needs. The Educational Master Plan gives evidence that the College defines the scope of its operations and identifies goals and strategies. Evaluation is conducted on all aspects of planning from the effectiveness of one-time funding requests to the accomplishment of strategic plan goals, which are directly tied back to the District and College mission. Realistically, when funds are reduced, it creates challenges, and improvements are met at a slower pace. Divisions and departments have limited allocated budgets to work with, and they often have to ask the Planning and Budget Committee for special funding for emergencies and program or services improvements.

Self Evaluation The College regularly and systematically assesses the effectiveness of its planning processes to achieve improvements in both the process and the College’s outcomes. Changes in the planning process will continue to occur to respond to evolving College needs, such as the ongoing integration of SLO assessment within the program review process and the further integration of planning with the budgeting process to form a single, cohesive, and participatory process.

Planning Agenda None. 7. The institution assesses its evaluation mechanisms through a systematic review of their effectiveness in improving instructional programs, student support services, and library and other learning support services.

Descriptive Summary The institution utilizes planning processes and mechanisms to measure the effectiveness of campus programs 87

and services. Quantitative and qualitative data are used in an effort to continually improve College programs and services. The comparison of successive program reviews, college-wide survey results, and ad-hoc research conducted on student learning and success indicate the extent to which the College has improved and provides information on areas that still need improvement. These determinations are based on statistical data, qualitative observations, and goal setting done during a specific review period. The other part of the College improvement process involves improving the process itself. The institutional planning process is outlined in the 2006 Educational Master Plan (EMP), which lays the foundation for the institution’s planning and assessment process. This master plan, coupled with shortterm plans, has set the stage for a comprehensive campus-wide planning process that serves as the primary evaluative tool for campus programs and services. Specific goals have been indicated in the EMP and in other campus plans and then are measured after a predictable timeframe to determine the effectiveness of these programs and services. The EMP serves as the College’s primary planning mechanism. This plan and others will be referenced in the following paragraphs as they relate to the discussion of determining the College’s effectiveness. First is the Accreditation Self Study. The College’s planning process and respective timelines for evaluation of programs and services are carefully considered with respect to the Self Study. The last Self Study report was released by the College in 2005. As a result of the Self Study findings, along with Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (ACCJC’s) recommendations, the College implemented further plans and action measures with the goal of improving programs and services. These are reflected in recent plan updates as discussed below, as well as in the 2008 Accreditation Midterm Report (2.39). Among the primary action measures was the implementation of an Educational Master Plan (EMP). This plan will be updated every ten years and is now effective through 2016. The EMP serves as the College’s comprehensive planning process and provides a means of gathering evidence and incorporating long-term goals with respect to College programs and services. 88

The EMP’s primary focus is on aligning goals with the mission and vision of the College. The EMP also informs and guides other campus plans, such as the College’s Strategic and District Strategic plans, Matriculation Plan, Student Equity Plan, Technology Plan, and Facilities Plan, as well as provides input into long-term decision making related to resource allocation (2.14). The College’s Strategic Plan is updated every four years with the current 2008 plan in effect until 2011. This plan’s objectives appropriately align with the new EMP but have a more specific focus on the campus “Quality Review” process in terms of evaluation of instructional programs and courses and student services programs with shorter-term goals. The 2004-2008 Strategic Plan (2.12) was developed and approved before the development of the EMP. To capitalize on the work and vision set forth in the new EMP, the College established new action plans that are reflected for the last two years of that Strategic Plan — 2006 through 2008. These action measures included efforts to coordinate goals with the EMP, a new Student Services Master Plan (SSMP) (2.15), and a new campus Technology Plan (2.18), in addition to the establishment of a multi-year calendar of major planning activities. This calendar identifies timeframes and sequential development of all such planning mechanisms (2.76). The 2008-2011 Strategic Plan includes additional action measures and campus-wide goals impacting programs and student services (2.13). This latest strategic plan has a specific timeframe and lead persons assigned to make sure that each objective is met. Also considered a major planning mechanism in the area of strategic planning is the new 2006 Districtwide Strategic Plan, developed by the District in an effort to address the changing workforce of California and meet the demands of neighboring communities through various programs. This plan has a direct impact on the programs and services being offered by the District’s colleges (2.36). The College evaluates its curriculum in terms of instructional quality, campus support services, and overall institutional effectiveness based on outcomes of measurable goals specified in various campus plans. The College also utilizes results of systematic surveys as a means of self evaluation and institutional effectiveness. The Noel-Levitz Student Survey is distributed in the Fall semester in odd-numbered years, i.e. 2003, Cypress College

2005, 2007, 2009, etc. The 2009 and prior surveys address important questions concerning matters that mean the most to students and whether or not the College is meeting these expectations (2.45). Several questions in the Climate Survey conducted in 2009 were related to satisfaction and importance of employee opinion on decision making (Figure 1). Although the general results indicated overall satisfaction on both areas to be satisfactory, perception varied among employee groups. Administrators, full-time faculty members, and members of shared-governance committees are more satisfied with their work and believe that their contributions are more influential, compared to the staff, part-time faculty, and those not involved in shared-governance committees. Administrators were also most likely to agree that they are aware and involved in campus planning, while parttime faculty were least likely to agree. Average scores are shown in the chart below for a select group of questions related to satisfaction and decision making (2.47). Both surveys collect information about specific populations, i.e. students, faculty, etc. The data are compared from one year to the next to determine which areas of the campus may need improvement and which ar-

eas have improved. In the area of campus services, the College set a standard of at least 75% satisfaction with each of the core survey measures although some departments set a higher standard for themselves. After the surveys are analyzed by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning, managers in each area review the results with their staff and complete a quality review report including a narrative that places the data in context, comments on any standards not met, and establishes program goals and objectives for the next several years. Summaries of these reports are included in an Institutional Effectiveness Report (IER) so that others on campus may see and understand the current goals of campus service programs. Campus services were reviewed in 2004, 2005, and 2007. They are now on a standard three-year cycle and were reviewed in Spring 2010. The campus also utilizes the IER and other data to make enrollment management decisions with potential impact on programs and services. The campus has a new Enrollment Management Committee to deal with related issues. Student services also gather evidence by conducting surveys of students who avail themselves of such services. The reviews are done at the department/division

Figure 1

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

level, discussed with deans, submitted to the Executive Vice President and, finally, entered into the Institutional Effectiveness Report (IER) (2.27).The IER includes student and staff demographics, institutional outcomes, and quality review results (2.27). This report has been a planning mechanism for the campus since 2005 (2.42, 2.43, 2.44). Quality Review includes outcomes as a result of Department Planning Program Review (2.21), Student Services Quality Review (SSQR) (2.8, 2.9), Campus Support Services Quality Review (CSSQR) (2.10), and Special Programs Quality Review. This report is yet another mechanism which serves as a validation tool for affirming what the College does right and what needs improvement. This helps in setting campus-wide priorities and budgeting.

the divisions’ programs participated in a four-year review cycle; it is now a three-year process. Each review involves a re-confirmation of course requisites through the curriculum process, among other important re-validation measures. Recent program progress and future plans of instructional programs are also evaluated as part of this process. In 2005, the Self Study Report (2.38) discussed this Quality Review process not only in terms of evaluation of the instructional programs themselves, but also the viability of this review process to determine if adjustments and/or revisions should be made. The decision to change to a three-year cycle of program review was a major outcome. Department Planning and Program Review was then revised to make it more focused on program effectiveness.

Program Review is an important evaluation mechanism with its goals stated in various plans such as the EMP and Strategic Plan. This process includes a comprehensive and multi-program review that takes into account all of the Quality Review processes noted above. The Program Review rotation schedule indicates which departments are up for review for instruction, as well as the rotation schedule for student services, campus services, and special programs (2.21, 2.77).

The College also responded to AACJC’s recommendation (2.37, 2.38, 2.39) to identify and assess student learning outcomes (SLOs) across the campus. The EMP and Strategic Plan both include strategies for incorporating SLOs into the College’s plans. As stated in the EMP, “Student Support Services will start the process of developing their SLOs in 2006-2007 and will be finished by the end of five years” (p. 152). This process was also applied to all of the College’s active courses and instructional programs and the institution as a whole with Institutional Learning Outcomes (ILOs). The SLO process is a cyclical process that is designed to effectively assess student achievement in our courses and programs once every 3 years. The steps involved to complete the course-level SLO process include the following: defining SLOs, defining means of assessment, collecting data for assessment, analyzing the collected data, and, finally, writing a report that includes action plans, to improve/maintain the quality of instruction. The overall goal of SLOs for all campus programs, including student services, is to collect, analyze, and use the information to improve courses, programs, and services. All issues pertaining to SLOs, including the process itself, are regularly evaluated to establish a continued cycle of institutional improvement and effectiveness (2.13).

The Campus Support Services are reviewed during the Spring every three years including Spring 2010. Cypress College distinguishes campus services from instructional and student service programs based upon function and the areas served. The College recognizes nine campus services (2.10):

◊

Academic Computing-Media Services

◊

Maintenance and Operations

◊

Bookstore

◊

Staff Development

◊

Bursar’s Office

◊

Production Center

◊

Campus Safety

◊

Public Information

◊

Institutional Research and Planning

Department Planning and Program Review for instructional programs requires that one-third of the College’s programs are reviewed each Fall on a rotating basis. Each rotation includes departments from a wide range of disciplines. Prior to Spring 2008, all of 90

The Academic Senate and the Associated Students Executive Board approved a draft of ILOs in April 2004; on May 6, 2004, the President’s Advisory Cabinet (PAC) reviewed and adopted the approved draft of ILOs (2.24, 2.78). The next step was to develop SLOs in instructional and student services areas. The College has made significant progress in this area. In Spring Cypress College

2007, departments had gathered data for at least one course and started analyzing that data the following Fall. A significant milestone for the College was the establishment of a Faculty SLO Coordinator position that Spring. Responsibilities of the coordinator include leading the SLO Team meetings to develop a cohesive, integrated process for assessing, documenting, and reporting SLOs; tracking and following up on the various SLO-CATs stages; organizing faculty and staff dialogues to plan the direction of the SLO-CATs process; providing updates to appropriate audiences; ensuring campus-wide communication and discussion of SLOs and their assessment; and writing an annual executive summary of progress. By May 2007, all 18 student services programs had established SLOs and assessment plans. In reviewing the SLO process recently, the College discussed the possibility of all student service programs focusing on a single theme - such as retention or persistence - for a single SLO cycle. The campus also has plans to explore ways to more fully integrate SLOs with the Collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s quality review process for student services. The goal in integrating the two processes is a more comprehensive assessment of each program, including how well it is helping students to achieve their educational goals. Faculty members have since been involved in SLO Dialogues, and several recommendations have been made to Academic Senate (2.78). Among those recommendations were that the College establish a timeline for completing the SLO assessment process for all courses, that each division appoint at least one SLO representative to an expanded SLO Team, and that each department create a plan for meeting the 2011 College goals and provide status reports to the deans and to the SLO Team representative at least twice a semester. The recommendations were discussed and approved at the September 27, 2007, meeting of the Cypress College Academic Senate (2.78). As of October 2010, faculty members have defined SLOs for 85% of the courses, defined assessment methods for 82%, and closed the loop on 48% of all the courses (2.95). Although the College started out focusing primarily on establishing and assessing course SLOs, the process has expanded to include individual program learning outcomes as well as special instructional programs (e.g. Supplemental Instruction, Peer Assisted Learning, Honors, and Service Learning). The College has been guided primarily by its Strategic Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

Plan, which includes directions and goals for Student Services. In 2005-2006 with the development of the EMP, a new Student Services Master Plan (SSMP) was also developed during the 2006-2007 academic year and adopted by the campus in Fall 2007 (2.15). The SSMP, which covers a seven-year period, supports the EMP. It is a document that will be used for strategic planning in the student services divisions at the College. The development of the SSMP was a very beneficial exercise for all areas. It provided student services staff members with an opportunity to review and evaluate their current programs, in addition to future planning. The SSMP was also developed in conjunction with recently completed Student Services Quality Reviews. The Program Review rotation for student services requires one-quarter of the programs to be reviewed each Fall. Special Programs were also included in this rotation beginning with the Spring 2008 semester. The student services offices included in this review include California Work Opportunity and Responsibility for Kids (CalWORKS), Cooperative Agencies for Resource Education (CARE), Disabled Students Program and Services (DSPS), Extended Opportunity Program and Services (EOPS), Library/Learning Resource Center (L/LRC), Study Abroad, International Students, Puente, Veterans Affairs, Admissions and Records (A&R), Assessment, Counseling, Financial Aid, Transfer Center, Student Activities, and the Health Center. The diagram of the planning process illustrates the relationship between long-term planning, strategic planning, and resource allocation processes (2.31). Apart from the formal mechanisms of evaluation already described, faculty and staff often make ad hoc research requests to the Office of Institutional Research and Planning to get information about the effectiveness of their programs and services (2.68, 2.72, 2.73).

Self Evaluation The College uses a variety of mechanisms to gather evidence about the effectiveness of programs and services and does extensive program planning at the department and instructional level. The entire quality review process, which includes instruction, student services, campus services, and special programs, takes a comprehensive look at effectiveness levels. While the instructional component has been around for quite 91

awhile, the student services, campus services, and special programs quality reviews are still rather new and are changing and evolving over time to help the institution do a better job of collecting evidence on effectiveness than had been the case in the past. One of the recent changes to the quality review process is to not only develop goals and objectives, but to also review those from the past to see if past practices have been effective or need to be changed. Those changes along with utilizing departmental performance data in considering one-time funding requests have led programs and services to continue improving or run the risk of losing out on much needed funding.

Planning Agenda None.

March 2004 – J:\Quality Review\Campus Support Services Quality Review 2.11 Cypress College Institutional Effectiveness Plan 2009 – www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rreports.aspx 2.12 Strategic Plan 2004-2008 for Cypress College 2004-2008 Strategic Plan with Objectives and Action Plans – J:\Planning 2.13 Strategic Plan 2008-2011 for Cypress College – www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Planning/ StrategicPlan2008-2011Final.pdf 2.14 Educational Master Plan for Cypress College- www. cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Planning/EducationalMasterPlan.pdf 2.15 Student Services Master Plan for Cypress College – www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Planning/ StudentServicesMasterPlan_2007-2014.pdf

Reference Documents

2.16 Distance Education Plan at Cypress College – www. cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Planning/CC_ DE_Plan_Final_040209.pdf

2.1 Cypress College Institutional Effectiveness Report 2006-2007. Chapter 5: A brief History of SLOs at Cypress College – J:\Institutional Effectiveness Task Force\IE Report 2007\IER07_Final.pdf

2.17 Student Equity Plan at Cypress College – www. cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Planning/20040 5StudentEquityPlanupdateoct06.pdf

2.2 Institutional Learning Outcomes Meeting Minutes, Reports and Information (2003-2004) – 2005 SelfStudy reference citations (2.1)

2.18 Technology Plan at Cypress College – www. cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Planning/CTC_ TechplanUPDATED.pdf

2.3 Student Learning Outcomes Dialogue and Forum Minutes (2007-2009) – J:\SLO Team\Dialogues\Minutes

2.19 Basic Skills Initiative Action Plan – www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments. aspx

2.4 Expanded Student Learning Outcomes Committee Agenda and Minutes (2007-2010) – J:\SLO Team\ ESLO

2.20 Basic Skills Initiative – www.cypresscollege.edu/ about/InstitutionalResearch/ResearchandEvaluation/ bsinitiative.aspx

2.5 General Education Outcomes Committee Agenda and Minutes (2009-2010) – J:\SLO Team\GE\Agenda-Minutes

2.21 Program Review - Department Planning & Program Review (formerly IQA) Cypress College Website – www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ProgramReview

2.6 Institutional Effectiveness Task Force Meeting Minutes (2000) - 2005 Self-Study reference citations (2.2)

2.22 Core Values Document (2004). Also see Reference 2.13

2.7 Campus-wide Institutional Effectiveness Colloquium Agenda, Minutes and Reports (2003) – J-Drive

2.23 Community Advisory Committee Agenda and Minutes (2004)

2.8 Student Services Quality Review Report (March 2004) – J:\Quality Review\Student Support Services Quality Review

2.24 President’s Advisory Cabinet – Agenda and Minutes – J:\President’s Advisory Cabinet

2.9 Student Services Quality Review form – J:\Quality Review\Student Support Services Quality Review\2009-10\ SSQR form 2.10 Campus Support Services Quality Review Report

2.25 Management Team information dissemination – J:\ Strategic Plan Review\Strategic Plan Update 2.26 Leadership Team information dissemination 2.27 Institutional Effectiveness 2008-2009 – www.

Cypress College

cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/SE/ IER2009forwebsite.pdf 2.28 Matriculation Plan – www.cypresscollege.edu/ about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 2.29 Strategic Planning Dashboard – www.cypresscollege.edu/Media/Website%20Resources/PDFs/ pio/2009-CypressCollege-Dashboard.pdf 2.30

Strategic Plan Progress Report

2.31 Diagram of the Planning Process – www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Planning/DiagramofthePlanningProcessatCypressCollege.pdf; www. cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/SE/ IER2009forwebsite.pdf 2.32 Schedule of Major Planning Events – J:\Planning – PBC Background Documents 2.33 Synchronizing Major Planning Efforts – J:\Planning – PBC Background Documents 2.34 Budget Planning Process – J:\Planning – PBC Background Documents 2.35 Strategic Planning Colloquium - J:\Planning\2_Planning\Strategic Plan 2008-2011 2.36 NOCCCD District Strategic Plan – www.nocccd. edu/StrategicPlanning/documents/nocccd_strategic_plan_062706.pdf 2.37 Accreditation Reports – www.cypresscollege. edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/Accreditation/ ResourcesforSelf-Study/areports.aspx 2.38 Institutional Self-Study – www.cypresscollege.edu/ IRP/Resources/Accreditation/R/CC-Self-Study-wlinks.pdf 2.39 Focused Mid-Term Report – www.cypresscollege. edu/IRP/Resources/Accreditation/R/FocusedMidTermReport_Final_Feb5_2008.pdf 2.40 Planning and Budget Minutes (May 15, 2008) – J:\ Planning & Budget Committee\PBC Minutes-Prior Years 2.41 Planning and Budget Minutes (September 18, 2008) – J:\Planning & Budget Committee\PBC MinutesPrior Years 2.42 Institutional Effectiveness 2005-06 – www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/SE/InstitutionalEffectivenessFullReportwCover2006.pdf 2.43 Institutional Effectiveness 2006-2007 – www. cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/SE/ IER07_FinalOct22.pdf 2.44 Institutional Effectiveness 2007-2008 – www.

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/SE/ IER_2007-2008.pdf 2.45 Student Satisfaction Survey, 2009 – www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/SE/NoelLevitz_summary_F09Sp10.pdf 2.46 Student Satisfaction Survey, 2007 – www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rsurveys. aspx 2.47 2009-2010 Campus Climate and Planning Survey Report – www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ResearchandEvaluation/rsurveys. aspx and www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/ Research/SE/CLIMATE200910brief.pdf 2.48 One-time Budget Allocation Form – J:\Planning & Budget Committee 2.49 One-time Budget Allocation Assessment Form – J:\ Planning & Budget Committee 2.50 Faculty Request Form – J:\ 2010-11 faculty request form 2.51

Classified Staff Needs Form

2.52

Facility Projects Form

2.53 Principles for Budget Reductions – J:\Planning & Budget Committee 2.54 2003-2004 Campus Climate Survey – www. cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/SE/ CampusClimateSurveyReport1_2004.pdf 2.55 2005-2006 Campus Climate Survey – www. cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/SE/ CypressCollege2006ClimateSurveyReport.pdf 2.56 2007-2008 Campus Climate Survey – www. cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/SE/ CAMPUSCLIMATESURVEYREPORT2008wsurvey. pdf 2.57 2005 End of the Year Report —www.cypresscollege.edu/newsEvents/Publications 2.58 2006 End of the Year Report —www.cypresscollege.edu/newsEvents/Publications 2.59 2007 End of the Year Report —www.cypresscollege.edu/newsEvents/Publications 2.60 2008 End of the Year Report – www.cypresscollege. edu/Media/Website%20Resources/PDFs/pio/2008CypressCollege-EOY.pdf 2.61 2009 End of the Year Report – www.cypresscollege. edu/Media/Website%20Resources/PDFs/pio/2009CypressCollege-EOY.pdf

2.62 Institutional Effectiveness Cycle, Institutional Effectiveness Report, Figure 28, p.72 – www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/SE/IER2009forwebsite.pdf 2.63 Cypress College Planning Diagram, Institutional Effectiveness Report, Figure 29, p.73 – www. cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/SE/ IER2009forwebsite.pdf

Research/PROGRAM_REVIEW_ROTATION_ SCHEDULE.pdf and www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/ Resources/Planning/CypressCollegeCycleofQualityReview_revised.pdf 2.78 Academic Senate Minutes – September 27, 2007 – J:\Academic Senate\Senate Minutes 07-08 2.79 Campus Technology Survey – J:\Campus Technology Committee

2.64 Institutional Effectiveness Cycle, Institutional Effectiveness Report, Figure 28, p.72 – www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/SE/IER2009forwebsite.pdf

2.80 Campus Technology Minutes – J:\Campus Technology Committee

2.65 Cypress College Planning Diagram, Institutional Effectiveness Report, Figure 29, p.73 – www. cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/SE/ IER2009forwebsite.pdf

2.82

Foundation Strategic Plan

2.83

Deans and Directors Minutes

2.66 Board of Trustees minutes – www.nocccd. edu/Trustees/documents/MinutesBoardMtg2008_11_11_000.pdf 2.67 Planning and Budget information dissemination – J:\ Planning & Budget Committee\PBC Minutes-Prior Years 2.68 Institutional Research and Planning website –www. cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch 2.69 Cypress College website – www.cypresscollege. edu/ 2.70 Departmental Planning and Program Review form – J:\IQA\Department Planning and Program Review\ Department Planning and Program Review Form 2.71 Cycle of Quality Review at Cypress College – www. cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Planning/CypressCollegeCycleofQualityReview_revised.pdf 2.72 Institutional Research Bulletins – www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ResearchandEvaluation/irbulletins.aspx 2.73 Institutional Research Surveys & Reports –www. cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ResearchandEvaluation/rsurveys.aspx 2.74 @Cypress – www.cypresscollege.edu/newsEvents/ news/AllNews.aspx 2.75 Student Right to Know Report – College Catalog, Page 45 – www.cypresscollege.edu/academics/ CollegeCatalog.aspx 2.76 Strategic Planning Framework – www.nocccd.edu/ StrategicPlanning/documents/Strategic_plan_at_a_ glance_June06.pdf 2.77 Program Review Rotation Schedule at Cypress College – www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/

2.81 Institutional Research Calendar – J:\Planning - 1_ IRP Office at CC

2.84 Curriculum Committee Minutes – J:\Curriculum minutes & other info 2.85 Staff Development – www.cypresscollege.edu/facultystaff/default.aspx 2.86 CTE Advisory Committees – Minutes maintained by individual CTE programs 2.87

Program Review Form – J:/IQA

2.88 Division Meetings – Agendas and Minutes retained in Division Offices 2.89 Department Meetings – Agendas and Minutes retained by Department 2.90 Workforce Development Committee – Agendas and Minutes retained in the Grants Office. 2.91 Campus Support Services Quality Review 20062007 – J:\Quality Review\Campus Support Services Quality Review\2006-2007\Inst Research Quality Review_Sp2007 2.92 Campus Support Services Quality Review 20092010 – J:\Quality Review\Campus Support Services Quality Review\2009-2010\CSSQRform.doc 2.93 Advertising Survey, Spring 2005 2.94 North Orange County Community College Districtwide Strategic Plan 2008-09 Update – J:\District Strategic Plan 2.95 SLO Status Worksheet for March 1st 2010 – J:\ SLO Team\SLO Status\2010 2.96 Budget Process Diagram (found at the end of Standard IB) 2.97 Enrollment Management Plan – www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Planning/EnrMgtPlan2009.

Cypress College

pdf 2.98 PBC Minutes re One-Time Funding – J:\Planning & Budget Committee\One Time Funding Process 1011 2.99 GE & BS Program Learning Outcomes – J:\Academic Senate\Senate Minutes 09-10, CCAS Minutes 4-22-10.approved, p. 6 2.100 Curriculum discussion re SLOs on syllabus – J:\ Curriculum minutes & Other Info\2008-2009, 14 apr 2009 min, p. 1

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Cypress College

Draft 1

Projects may be funded out of order if grants or other additional monies are found.

Step 8: PAC & PBC review prioritized list of funding proposals, allocating available one-time funding to the projects with the highest priority.

Step 3: PAC & PBC decide to open carry-over to onetime funding requests

Step 5: Safety Committee reviews one-time funding proposals and identifies safety risk associated with the projects

Step 4: PBC/Vice President of Administrative Services calls for one-time funding proposals

Step 9: Projects receiving funding submits evaluation form showing utilization of project funds to PBC. PBC reviews evaluations to determine successful utilization of funds.

Step 6: Strategic Plan Direction Committees rank one-time funding proposals in their areas

Step 2: PAC & PBC decide to fund pending projects from prior year and pre-allocations

Step 7: PBC members individually rank proposals based on proposal merits, direction committee priorities, and safety issues. The committee prepares a final priority list taking into consideration individual rankings. The list is forwarded to PAC for approval

Step 1: Presidentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Staff reviews budget and recommends that carryover funds are allocated

Budget Process Diagram

Standard II Student Learning Programs and Services

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

Standard IIA: Instructional Programs The institution offers high-quality instructional programs in recognized and emerging fields of study that culminate in identified student outcomes leading to degrees, certificates, employment, or transfer to other higher education institutions or programs consistent with its mission. Instructional programs are systematically assessed in order to assure currency, improve teaching and learning strategies, and achieve stated student learning outcomes. The provisions of this standard are broadly applicable to all instructional activities offered in the name of the institution. Student learning and success is a high priority at Cypress College as evidenced by the breadth and depth of the instructional programs, the wide range of student services, the extensive library services and holdings, and the array of academic support services. Students are challenged to achieve excellence whether they are working toward a degree, preparing to transfer to a four-year institution, training for a technical career, developing basic skills, or seeking personal enrichment. The quality of instructional programs, student services, and library and academic support services are ensured through institutionalized cycles of program review and a painstaking curricular process. Student learning and student satisfaction are monitored using a variety of methods including assessment of student learning outcomes (SLOs) and student satisfaction surveys. 1. The institution demonstrates that all instructional programs, regardless of location or means of delivery, address and meet the mission of the institution and uphold its integrity.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College continues to fulfill its mission and meet the current and future needs of its students and community through a wide range of high quality courses and training. The College mission states, “Cypress College enriches students’ lives by providing high quality education for transfer to four-year institutions, associate degrees, career technical education, and certificate coursework, as well as basic skills and opportunities for Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

lifelong learning. The college is committed to promoting student learning and success, embracing diversity, and contributing to both the economic and social development of the surrounding community” (3.1). The College has continued to provide the highest course and instructional quality. For existing courses and programs, the College has developed SLOs for 85% of all active courses and has also developed General Education and Basic Skills PLOs and ILOs. At the same time, the College has implemented the use of the software program CurricUNET to streamline the curriculum process and the assessment management software TracDat to facilitate effective organization and use of SLOs (3.88). In addition, the College continues to respond to the needs of the local community and industry by expanding course offerings and modes of delivery for collegiate, pre-collegiate, transfer, and occupational courses. For example, in Fall 2001, the College offered 12 online courses across five divisions; by Spring 2008,148 online sections and 15 hybrid sections (utilizing both online and face-to-face teaching methods) of 113 courses were offered across nine divisions (3.2). The quality of each instructional program is ensured through a variety of means, including a rigorous curriculum approval and revision process, ongoing and systematic program review, integration of student learning outcomes into course curriculum outlines and course evaluation, regular review of student success and retention data by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning, and analysis of student satisfaction as measured every two years. Instructional offerings are in two primary modes – traditional classroom and distance education. Distance education course offerings (fully online and hybrid) have been increased progressively over the last five years to provide access to students. In order to ensure that distance education courses follow the rigorous requirements of traditional courses, a Distance Education Plan (DE Plan) was prepared and approved in Spring 2009 (3.2). The College submitted a proposal to approve the substantive change caused by offering 50% or more of the courses in DE mode for 18 associate degree programs and 54 certificate programs. ACCJC approved the proposal on September 17, 2009. The DE Plan provides details of how the College ensures quality of instruction as well as student services 99

for students enrolled in its DE courses. 1.a. The institution identifies and seeks to meet the varied educational needs of its students through programs consistent with their educational preparation and the diversity, demographics, and economy of its communities. The institution relies upon research and analysis to identify student learning needs and to assess progress toward stated learning outcomes.

Descriptive Summary At Cypress College, students have the opportunity to select from a wide variety of courses and programs to meet their educational goals, whether these goals include working toward an Associate of Arts or Associate of Science degree, an occupational certificate, or life-long learning. Cypress College offers a variety of formats for instruction to help address the diverse educational needs of students such as classroom, online, short-term, full-term, and hybrid. Instructional opportunities are available to students from 7 am to 10 pm, Monday through Friday. Online courses are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Planning for class schedules involves collaboration between faculty, department chairs, division deans, instructional staff, and student support services. In addition, Cypress College utilizes economic forecast data, community demographic profiles, and ongoing collaboration with industry partners, employers, and members of advisory committees to inform and validate course offerings, programs, implementation, and scheduling. Two documents prepared and used extensively are Research Bulletins (3.81) that are prepared every semester and the annual Institutional Effectiveness Report (3.36). These reports provide a demographic analysis as well as student information. The deans, under the leadership of the Executive Vice President, use the demographic information, fill-rate data, demand for classes, and success and retention information to offer courses and programs suited to student needs. Complementing a well-rounded schedule of classes and outstanding student support services, Cypress College also provides extensive Matriculation services for all students. Student assessments help students determine college readiness. Counselors utilize assessment results to assist students with course selection during 100

group orientations. Currently, the College is exploring the feasibility of implementing mandatory student orientations for all incoming students. Research shows that students completing Counseling 140, Educational Planning, are more likely to be successful in later coursework and more likely to graduate than students who do not take Counseling 140 (3.3). In Summer 2010, Cypress College implemented a pilot summer bridge program, LinkME to College, targeting students from the top ten feeder high schools who test into developmental Math or developmental English. LinkME to College student participants are tracked by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning for program evaluation and outcomes. All Cypress College students are currently tracked by the Institutional Research and Planning Office to analyze persistence, retention, and the impact on successful student matriculation. Cypress College ensures the quality of instruction, programs, and services through ongoing dialogue among faculty members via departmental meetings, collaboration with business and advisory committees, a rigorous curriculum process, and a comprehensive program review process and quality review process facilitated by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning (3.82). In addition, the Staff Development office coordinates forums to share best practices across disciplines (3.85). Finally, the College utilizes the Educational Master Plan, which provides a decade of direction for educational planning (3.84). Planning at Cypress College involves collaboration and shared governance. Each campus stakeholder contributed to the Mission and Vision of Cypress College in a variety of forums. Academic Senate, campus-wide committees, division meetings, and department meetings are a few examples of how the College integrates a diversity of perspectives into the planning process. Examples of these committees and groups include Management Team, Leadership Team, Deans and Directors Team, Presidentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Advisory Cabinet, Planning and Budget Committee, Student Services Council, Enrollment Management Committee, Matriculation Committee, Basic Skills Initiative Committee, Curriculum Committee, Staff Development Committee, Student Services Master Plan Committee, Educational Master Plan Committee, Diversity Committee, and Student Equity Plan Committee. The College relies on leaderCypress College

ship from these various committees and groups in the planning process to set priorities, conduct needs assessments, identify outcomes, develop activities and timelines, identify resources, implement evaluation, and coordinate collaboration with each other to achieve desired results. In addition, the College utilizes data from the Office of Institutional Research and Planning to make informed planning decisions. Examples of this research include Student Satisfaction Surveys, Campus Climate Surveys, Institutional Effectiveness Reports, ARCC Reports, Institutional Research Bulletins, and Program Reviews for instruction, student services, campus support services, and special programs (3.82). Despite substantial budget reductions to categorical programs during the 2009-2010 and 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2011 school years, the North Orange County Community College District (NOCCCD) and Cypress College have remained committed to providing premier student support services for all students, including for some of the most socio-economically disadvantaged students on campus. For example, during the 2009-2010 academic year, Cypress College and NOCCCD provided substantial funding to offset the budget shortfalls from the state of California. Rather than transfer the budget shortfalls directly to the most disadvantaged students served on campus by severely reducing or eliminating programs and services, the administration at the College provided financial support to minimize downsizing of staff as well as provided money for books for EOPS/CARE students. This gesture exemplifies the commitment of the campus to students during challenging economic timesâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;a commitment to the most disadvantaged students on campus, keeping the promise of access and retention to higher education in California, and ultimately ensuring a campus climate rich in diversity (3.89).

Self Evaluation The Office of Institutional Research and Planning provides Cypress College with an enhanced understanding of student needs, which help implement data-driven decisions impacting programs and services. Central to the mission and vision of Cypress College, embracing diversity and facilitating student success are commitments that manifest themselves in various forms throughout the campus and in the community (3.4). Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

The Office of Institutional Research and Planning provides Success and Retention Reports at the conclusion of each semester. These reports inform the campus about specific courses where students achieve success. Equally important, these reports reveal specific courses where students may be struggling. The data are used by instructional leaders during department meetings as well as by student support services areas, including academic support services. Additionally, this information is included in program review documents. It provides the foundation for meaningful discourse when faculty and staff review curriculum, analyze intervention strategies, and enhance academic support tools to assist student learning (3.36). In addition to Success and Retention Reports, the Office of Institutional Research and Planning provides every semester a list of courses with low student success rates. Academic support services in the Learning Resource Center regularly utilize this list to target very limited resources for Tutorial Services, Supplemental Instruction, and learning tools available in the Math Learning Center. Also, student support services at the College utilize this data to target intervention efforts for students from educationally, socially, and economically disadvantaged backgrounds. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning also provides data regarding the effectiveness of special programs and the success of specific student populations, i.e., the Supplemental Instruction program (SI). SI provides students with an opportunity to participate in a study group led by an SI Leader, usually someone who has previously passed the same course with the same instructor. In all student performance measures, SI proved to be a beneficial program. Students who attended an SI session had higher success rates than students in the same sections who did not attend an SI session. Students who attended 12 or more hours of SI (SI participants) had higher success rates than did either those who attended SI for fewer than 12 hours and those who did not attend any SI study group sessions. Finally, students who attended more hours of SI were more likely to be successful than students who attended fewer hours of SI (3.5). Cypress College searches for innovative ways to find permanent funding for the institutionalization of Supplemental Instruction. Students in Extended Opportunity Programs & Services (EOPS), exemplify a specific population of students 101

for which data on success is provided by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning. Table1 shows a comparison of math course success rates for EOPS students—historically disadvantaged students from lowincome backgrounds—and Cypress College students as a whole. EOPS relies on data like that in Table 1 to make informed decisions regarding academic support services, student support services, and allocation of diminishing resources during these challenging budget years. The ongoing data provided by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning is very beneficial for programmatic efforts targeting specific subgroups of students. The data in the table provides EOPS with a helpful snapshot of how EOPS students perform in comparison to the overall College. The Fall 2009 Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory revealed that student respondents most often reported high satisfaction with the quality of instruction, safety and security of the campus, and ease of accessibility of the online process for course registration. Overall, from 2007 to 2009, student respondents reported increased satisfaction with the beautification of the College campus, campus safety, and the institutional commitment to students with disabilities. Conversely, student respondents reported increased dissatisfaction with course registration, infrequent course offerings, and inconvenient class times. The areas of dissatisfaction may be explained by increasing enroll-

ments and decreasing state funding resulting in the reduction of course sections offered at the College (3.36, pp. 14, 19 & 21).

Planning Agenda None. 1.b. The institution utilizes delivery systems and modes of instruction compatible with the objectives of the curriculum and appropriate to the current and future needs of its students.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College offers a full spectrum of educational delivery systems and modes of instruction to best serve the current and future needs of students. Access to learning at Cypress College includes the following options in addition to traditional on-campus courses (3.6):

◊

Learning Communities

◊

Online courses

◊

Hybrid courses

◊

Web-enhanced courses

◊

Service Learning courses

◊

Short-term courses of varying lengths

◊

Study abroad programs

◊

Summer sessions

Student Success Rates for Selected Math Courses Spring 2009 Course

EOPS* Success Rate

Cypress College Success Rate

Math 15 Pre-Algebra

48%

57%

Math 20 Elementary Algebra

36%

37%

Math 40 Intermediate Algebra

50%

46%

Math 141 College Algebra

46%

38%

Math 142 Trigonometry

45%

Math 150A Calculus & Analytical Geometry

45%

42%

Table 1

*Due to the smaller number of EOPS student enrollment, the data is taken from Fall 2006 to Spring 2009.

102

Cypress College

◊

Teleconferencing (Educational Interpreter Training Program)

◊

Webinar (Health Information Technology)

◊

Weekend classes (currently discontinued)

◊

Work experience

◊

Open-entry/exit courses

Dialogue surrounding delivery systems and modes of instruction on campus is extensive and occurs regularly at the Curriculum Committee, the Deans Meetings, the Distance Education Committee, and at Staff Development planning meetings. Like many colleges, Cypress College has increased the number of courses and sections offered in an online format. In Fall 2001, the College offered 12 online courses across five divisions; by Spring 2008, it offered 148 online sections and 15 hybrid sections (utilizing both online and in-person teaching methods) of 113 courses across nine divisions. Cypress College academic programs have implemented distance education for a variety of reasons, including a desire to offer instruction in a variety of formats and delivery modes, meet student needs, provide instructional opportunities to students who would not otherwise have access, meet high student demand for distance education options, program survival in periods of low enrollment, recruitment of Distance Education students to the on-campus program, competition with programs offered by other institutions, and efficient physical space utilization when distance education is the only way to grow a program (3.7). Given the growth in the number of courses offered through Distance Education, the Distance Education Plan for 2008 – 2011 was created. The development of the plan included:

◊

Planning Stage

◊

Development Stage

◊

Writing Stage

◊

Review Stage (entire College invited to participate)

◊

Final Review and Approval

The Educational Interpreter Training Program (EITP) began offering courses in Fall 2006, which included Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

regular live teleconferences. The EITP broadcast originates from Cypress College with participation of students both on-campus and at various alternative locations throughout the State from as far north as Butte County and as far south as Imperial County. Off-site students view the broadcast and interact with the instructor and students from Cypress College, as well as those at each remote location. EITP offers training that meets the needs of sign language interpreters in K-12 settings and complies with state certification requirements (3.8). The Study Abroad Program provides students the opportunity to enrich their educational experience by studying abroad for one semester or for a shorter period of time, depending on course offerings, while earning college units. The program is designed not only to enrich course content by their location in the country where they are offered, but also to provide students with a multi-cultural experience by living in a society and environment different from that of the United States. Cypress College frequently offers programs in partnership with Fullerton College (3.9, 3.86). Health Information Technology (HIT) classes are designed to provide students optimal support for learning through traditional course offerings and Webinar— synchronous seminars conducted over the Internet (3.10). A recently procured grant specific to HIT will provide program faculty with the opportunity to explore the development of additional curriculum and alternative delivery modes. Although Cypress College began offering weekend classes nearly 20 years ago, with the budget crisis, these classes are not being scheduled at the present time. Before the decision to eliminate the weekend classes was made, an analysis was done to understand the impact of such a decision. Only 3% of students were found to be attending weekend classes only; the rest of the students taking weekend courses were also on campus on other days. A variety of year-long learning programs provide students with unique and exciting educational experiences. These programs include the following: the Puente Program, the Legacy Program, and LinkME. The Puente Program pairs English classes focusing on Latino literature with a counseling class. Legacy, which is a three-semester program, links English courses with a counseling class in the Fall and an Ethnic Studies class 103

in the Spring and the following Fall, focuses on issues of cultural diversity by significantly incorporating African-American literature. LinkME targets students from the top ten feeder high schools who test into developmental Math or developmental English classes and are linked to a counseling class (3.10). In addition, several learning communities have provided interdisciplinary instruction. These learning community cohorts integrate common goals, objectives, student learning outcomes, and assignments. In the University Transfer Achievement Program (UTAP) — a year-long learning community — students enroll in an English class that is paired with a counseling class and additional academic classes such as Theater, U. S. History, College Study Strategies, Human Communication, Psychology, Library Research Skills, or Geology. These courses share integrated instruction and assignments. Semester-length learning communities have also been offered. “Reading Between the Lines” provided integrated instruction in a developmental English and math class. The “Dental Talk” learning community paired Dental Assisting with an Interpersonal Communication course. “Close Encounters” linked Interpersonal Communication with Airline Customer Care. In the latter two learning communities, technology was used to enhance the interdisciplinary curriculum and community connections. An English and a Japanese learning community has also provided integrated instruction for several years (3.12). The Teacher Preparation Program offers course sections designed for future teachers (3.10). During year five of the last Title V Grant, thirty students completed the Vocational Internship Program, in collaboration with businesses and industry in the surrounding community (3.13).

Self Evaluation Cypress College determines that delivery of instruction fits the objectives and content of its courses primarily through the curriculum approval process, but also through the application of student learning outcomes (SLO), data from Student Success and Course Completion research, data from degree/certificate completion, transfer rates, the Distance Education Report for online instruction, comparison of performance in same courses offered via different modes, and faculty recommendations. 104

Course and curriculum approval is the responsibility of the Cypress College Curriculum Committee, overseen by the Academic Senate. The Curriculum Committee relies upon the expertise of the faculty to determine appropriate delivery methods for individual courses. The formal process for course approval is well defined and compatible with student needs, and SLO courselevel assessments provide data on the effectiveness of instruction in relationship to course objectives. The Distance Education Subcommittee established course Instructional Objectives as the core criteria in determining which of the Distance Education delivery methods is most appropriate for instructional needs. If all Instructional Objectives of a particular course can be accomplished with comparable rigor, depth, and breadth to traditionally delivered courses, then the Curriculum Committee can approve the course to be offered in the online format. In this respect, if the course’s Instructional Objectives require a significant student-faculty in-person component to achieve the learning objectives, the Committee may recommend the Hybrid course format rather than the exclusively online format (3.17). All Cypress College distance education courses are offered in accord with applicable statutory and regulatory guidelines. Substantive change proposals have been approved as required by ACCJC for all programs subject to the 50% or more on-line provisions. The most recent request for substantive change was approved in Fall 2009. The Educational Interpreter Training program operates independently of the Distance Education Program and, therefore, has established its own policies and procedures. However, documentation of guidelines pertaining to broadcast distance education is a part of the DE Plan Goals and Objectives (3.7). Measuring the effectiveness of an institution’s delivery methods and evaluating student learning is essential to student success. Understanding what is working and why it is working is just as important as understanding what is not working and why it is not working. Cypress College evaluates the effectiveness of delivery methods in meeting student needs and accomplishing student learning through:

◊

Program review

◊

Instructor and course evaluations

◊

Completion and success rate reports Cypress College

◊

Course SLOs and PLOs utilizing different modes of delivery

Between the Lines.” As a consequence, this learning community had a full cohort in Fall 2008.

◊

Enrollment trends in courses utilizing non-standard methods of delivery.

◊

Title V-funded evaluations of specific programs, such as specific learning communities

The courses offered via distance education undergo the same review process as traditional courses. The Distance Education Program will be reviewed as an administrative unit and undergo a Campus Support Service Quality Review process with other special programs in Spring 2011 (3.82).

Evaluations and adjustments have been made within the College’s learning communities to make them more effective. In May 2007, after an evaluation of the Year 4 University Transfer Achievement Program (UTAP) Freshman Experience Program, it was determined that adding a dedicated counselor and counseling class to the year-long learning community greatly enhanced the ability of its students to succeed and persist. Also contributing to the success of the 2006-2007 UTAP cohort was that Cypress College students, rather than staff, called high school students assessed for English placement in the spring and encouraged them to enroll in the UTAP learning community. Consequently, in Fall 2007 the UTAP Freshman Experience sections filled quickly with students eager to initiate their college careers. UTAP Freshman Experience Program added another cohort of students, increasing the number of students served to 50 students. At the end of the year, the success rate for both cohorts exceeded previous years’ rates. To revise the 2006-2007 year-long UTAP Freshman Experience Learning Community, the Learning Communities Coordinator and lead faculty member worked with three other course instructors, a counselor, the Dean of Counseling, and the Matriculation Manager. Together they analyzed previous years’ success and retention rates, the characteristics of the previous years’ learning community students, the organization of the curricula shared by the instructors, and the extent of support from student services. Based on their analysis, a counselor was assigned to the 2007-2008 learning community; the two cohorts of the UTAP learning community experienced an 89% success rate in Year 5 (3.83). The Basic Skills English and math learning community “Reading Between the Lines” was also evaluated and revised. Because of the success of student-initiated calls for UTAP the previous year, in Summer 2008, Cypress College students contacted high school students assessed into basic skills English/reading and math courses and encouraged them to enroll in “Reading Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

An additional goal of the Distance Education Plan is to work with campus-wide groups including Disabled Students Program and Services (DSPS), Academic Computing, and Staff Development on an accessibility review process. Currently, the DE Program is in the process of acquiring software for Ed Code 508 compliance. After the faculty is trained, the Committee plans to create a review process, as required by the State Chancellor’s Distance Education Guidelines (3.19). Expected completion date is Spring 2011 (3.7). Success and Retention reports are incorporated into Program Review reports and are re-examined by online status, basic skills progress, prerequisite and placement exam validations, and evaluations of other programs and grant-funded activities. Although the Success and Retention Report comes out every fall and spring, the IR&P Office provides in-depth analyses for specific programs throughout the year (3.36, 3.77).

Planning Agenda None. 1.c. The institution identifies student learning outcomes for courses, programs, certificates, and degrees; assesses student achievement of those outcomes; and uses assessment results to make improvements.

Descriptive Summary The campus has engaged in considerable dialogue related to the adoption of the student learning outcomes (SLO) assessment process. The campus initiated discussions regarding institutional learning outcomes as early as 2002 and adopted its final version in 2004. The initial group of interested faculty and campus personnel has evolved into the Expanded SLO Committee comprised of the SLO coordinator, the SLO Facilitator, at least one faculty representative from each division, the campus Staff Development Coordinator, the 105

Director of the Institutional Research and Planning, and other interested campus representatives. Over the past few years, many meetings and multiple dialogue sessions have provided the opportunity for faculty and management to raise concerns, voice questions and frustrations, and provide input. In late 2007, the Academic Senate approved a timeline for the completion of the SLO assessment process or “loop.” At that time, the timeline called for the completion of all course SLOs by Spring 2011 and completion of 50% of all course loops (3.20). Completion of the loop consists of writing the SLOs, developing an assessment plan, collecting data, analyzing the data collected, completing a report of assessment results, and implementing any necessary changes. As of Fall 2009, 68% of all SLOs were completed and 21% of the loops were completed; SLOs were on target, but loop completion rate was below target (3.21). In 2008, the Academic Senate and Curriculum Committee approved the addition of SLOs as part of the curriculum approval process (3.22) for all new and revised courses. It is to be noted, however, that the curriculum committee does not approve the course SLOs. SLOs development is the responsibility of each academic department, advised by the SLO Committee. SLOs have been added to course outlines, and starting in Spring 2010, SLOs were required in course syllabi across the campus and were added to the program/quality review evaluations. These changes will accelerate the completion of the campus SLO writing timeline. The development of course SLOs and PLOs and implementation of the SLO assessment process are faculty responsibilities. Most of the process has occurred at the individual, team, and/or department level. Teams and/or departments have met to identify course SLOs, assessment methods, analyze data, and complete reports. Each department is responsible for developing assessment methodology, timelines, and evaluation processes. SLO reports were submitted to the SLO Team and were archived on the campus’ J: drive. In 2008, the campus purchased the TracDat assessment management software for the SLO process (3.23). Most of the SLO reports on the J: drive were uploaded into TracDat. Faculty training of data entry methods began in Fall 2009. As with the curriculum process, data entry into TracDat will become a faculty responsibility in the 106

future. In 2009, the campus SLO Team began to focus on program and general education outcomes. Two forums and multiple division presentations were conducted by the SLO Team to introduce the PLO process. A General Education and Basic Skills Committee compromised of representatives from all divisions was formed and the GE & Basic Skills PLOs were developed after 10 meetings that were held during Fall 2009 and Spring 2010. PLOs were developed for mostly vocational programs. As of October 2010, 27 out of the 32 programs, including the GE & Basic Skills Program, have developed their PLOs. The remaining programs will define their PLOs by Spring of 2011. In the Campus Support Services Review conducted in Spring 2010, all units noted that they will develop AUOs by Fall 2011 (3.76).

Self Evaluation The College has successfully engaged the faculty in a dialogue regarding the SLO assessment process. Although the campus shared the statewide concern regarding workload issues that did not stand in the way of moving the SLO process forward. The campus management team has been supportive and involved in the entire process, evident by their willingness to purchase and maintain the TracDat assessment management software. The campus Office of Institutional Research and Planning has consistently worked with the SLO Team, campus departments, and individual instructors. The office provides departments with the data relevant to the entire SLO process. Data related to enrollment trends, FTES, WSCH/FTEF, successful course completion, retention, and number of certificates and/or degrees, where applicable, are supplied. The history of the SLO assessment process at Cypress College as documented in the “Introductory Documents — SLOs” section is evidence of the milestones the College has achieved in establishing this process. The program review form was modified in Spring 2009 to include SLO assessment. Beginning Fall 2009, all instructional and student services programs included reporting progress of SLO achievement as a part of their internal review and used the information to strengthen the programs. Campus Support Services has also made the commitment to develop Administrative Unit Outcomes by 2012.

Cypress College

Planning Agenda None. 2. The institution assures the quality and improvement of all instructional courses and programs offered in the name of the institution, including collegiate, developmental, and pre-collegiate courses and programs, continuing and community education, study abroad, short-term training courses and programs, programs for international students, and contract or other special programs, regardless of type of credit awarded, delivery mode, or location.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College regulates the quality and improvement of all instructional courses by the interplay of highly qualified faculty and other personnel, the Curriculum Committee, Academic Senate, the Deans Council, advisory boards, and stringent course and program review. Programs and courses are developed and offered using the quantitative and qualitative information obtained by the institution and the divisions. Examples of quantitative information are the Institutional Research Bulletin (published every semester) and Institutional Effectiveness Report (3.36, 3.81). Qualitative information is obtained from the expertise of faculty in their fields and environment scan. The College is committed to hiring faculty who go beyond the state mandated minimum qualifications, seeking those with outstanding expertise in their discipline and demonstrated ability to effectively communicate that expertise to students. For those programs which are technical and/or occupational, hiring committees look for individuals with high levels of training and proven workplace experience. Programs and courses are developed and offered using quantitative and qualitative information obtained by the institution and the divisions. Examples of quantitative information are the Institutional Research Bulletin (published every semester) and Institutional Effectiveness Report (3.36). Qualitative information is obtained from the expertise of faculty in their fields. The Curriculum Committee at Cypress College is committed both to facilitating a department or programâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ability to create new courses and/or revise exInstitutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

isting ones and also to ensuring that such courses meet the highest standards. Each division has its own Curriculum Committee Representative to help disseminate information and assist in getting courses through the curriculum process. The Curriculum Committee developed a Curriculum Handbook in 1989-1990 to assist Division Representatives and other committee members who were working with faculty in the creation and revision of curriculum. The current CurricUNET system incorporated all the pertinent policies, processes, and forms contained in the Handbook into this automated system; making the information more widely available and readily accessible to any faculty or staff member participating in curriculum development and approval. In 2009, the committee also created and disseminated a new Curriculum Development Training Guide and a FAQ document in order to provide up-to-date guidance on developing a quality Course Outline of Record and ensuring timely approval of proposals. The original Handbook is still available in print, but most assistance is now provided via links to resources on the Collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s CurricUNET page and accompanying help screens. (3.24, 3.25). Program Review is an integral part of quality assurance at Cypress College. The instrument used for program review has been revised several times over the last nineteen years. The latest review of the process was conducted in Spring 2009. In its current form, the program review process analyzes quantitative data, evaluates SLO achievement, and identifies resources required for continued service to students. This is the first time that the program review process directly links budget allocation with quantitative and qualitative review of programs. The process of linking budget planning with program review has been implemented for student support and campus support programs as well (3.76).

Self Evaluation Faculty form the cornerstone of instructional quality at Cypress College. It takes four years for a faculty member to attain tenure, and both full-time and adjunct faculty are formally evaluated on a regular cycle. Regular faculty members are evaluated every three years in accord with the Education Code and the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Adjunct faculty members are evaluated in the first semester of service and at least once in every six semesters subsequently. Some de107

partments, such as the English as a Second Language Department, use a mentor system whereby an experienced full-time faculty member provides assistance to other faculty members who may be teaching a course for the first time. In addition, faculty can participate every semester in a voluntary Student Satisfaction Survey (3.26) of any course they teach in order to gain further feedback on their effectiveness. The College is committed to providing continuing education and development for its faculty. Opening Day, held each semester, has featured keynote speakers who address pedagogical issues such as the August 18, 2006, presentation by Dr. Janet Zadina, “Using Brain Research to Enhance Student Success.” In addition to providing training on any new technology that affects faculty, such as Web Training, Blackboard, CurricUNET, and TracDat, Staff Development often conducts pedagogically-related events during the semester such as “Instructors’ Understanding and Use of Learning Styles,” a sabbatical presentation by Michael Flores, Professor of History, April 15, 2010 (3.27) Faculty are also encouraged to present at and/or participate in professional conferences. The curriculum process continues to provide guidelines for a high standard of quality assurance. The search for a means to streamline the process and make it more accessible to both faculty and Curriculum Committee members led to the advent of CurricUNET. The entire curriculum process is now online and readily available to all parties involved in creating a new course or revising an existing one. Faculty within their individual departments and programs are responsible for the quality of course content and instruction. Their expertise enables them to determine if new courses are needed or if a course’s content needs to be updated to remain current with recent and/or future developments within their discipline. Each course outline must be revisited every five years, if not sooner. A full Program Review by each department or program is on a three-year cycle. During Spring 2010, a Distance Education Course Quality Rubric was approved by the Academic Senate. The rubric provides guidelines to help faculty teaching online to assess the quality of their online course content and ease of use to students (3.28). Open dialogue with other offices or governing bodies on campus, such as the Academic Senate, Matricula108

tion, the Office of Institutional Research and Planning, and the UC/CSU Articulation Officer, among others, as well as the use of a wide variety of data sources including SLOs, the Institutional Effectiveness Report, the Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction, and the Climate Survey of Faculty and Staff, are used to assist in determining the quality and effectiveness of the College’s courses and programs.

Planning Agenda None. 2.a. The institution uses established procedures to design, identify learning outcomes for, approve, administer, deliver, and evaluate courses and programs. The institution recognizes the central role of its faculty for establishing quality and improving instructional courses and programs.

Descriptive Summary The responsibility for developing courses and programs lies in the hands of the faculty. Recommendations for courses and programs may come from a variety of sources such as administrators and advisory committees, but it is only when faculty take action that the course development process can begin. The consultation phase of the curriculum process is delineated in the Curriculum Handbook and incorporated automatically into the CurricUNET approval process. In this first phase, the faculty member is encouraged to interact with others in the department, division, related divisions on campus, Fullerton College, the Articulation Officer and, in some cases, the Dean of Career Technical Education and Economic Development (3.25). The intention is that the extended discussions with others will identify potential problems and lead to a better and more fully developed course or program. CurricUNET approval requires a sign-off by a representative from each level (department, division, Articulation, Fullerton & SCE campuses) before the proposal can move ahead to the Curriculum Committee. Proposals can be returned to the originator at any time for further discussion with others and modifications if necessary. Once those preliminary steps have been taken, courses and programs must be submitted to the Curriculum Committee for approval. That Committee is faculty Cypress College

chaired and dominated by faculty representatives but also includes representatives from the administration, classified staff, and Associated Students. Careful scrutiny is given to all elements of the course proposal, particularly the course outline. The Curriculum Committee may either suggest or insist upon certain changes in the course or program before final approval is granted in order to improve the proposal and thus, ultimately, the instruction that occurs in those courses (3.25). The responsibility for evaluating courses and programs is also faculty driven. While some evaluation does occur during tenure and peer review, the primary evaluative tool is the Program Review process. Every three years each department on campus is asked to evaluate its courses and programs and provide an Action Plan for improvement (3.44). Under newly revised procedures, the Action Plans are more closely linked to both the curricular and planning and budget processes as one means of enhancing the potential improvements (3.30). Another means of evaluating courses and programs is the review by external agencies. The health science programs have accrediting bodies that have determined the appropriate and expected student learning outcomes for each profession and program. It is the responsibility of the faculty and Department Coordinator to ensure that these outcomes are met. Both a Departmental Self Study and a site visit by the accrediting agency for each program take place in order to ensure compliance (3.31). As data related to the SLO process started increasing, a way to integrate the assessment process and create a repository for all SLO-related data was needed. The College invested in an integrated assessment management software, TracDat (3.23), in September 2008. The main purpose of this software is to house all the SLOs and PLOs, work as a centralized source for documenting assessment results, and generate reports that inform the institution about the status of SLO and PLO accomplishments. One of the functional requirements of the software is the existence of an Institutional Effectiveness Plan that maps the SLOs and assessments with the institution’s Mission and Vision. A taskforce created in December 2008 developed an Institutional Effectiveness Plan that helped prepare a roadmap for configuration of TracDat according to the needs of the College (3.35). The plan was develInstitutional Self Study — Spring 2011

oped during Fall 2009, and after a review by various shared governance committees and feedback from the faculty and staff, the plan was approved by the Academic Senate and President’s Advisory Cabinet in May 2009. The initial training for configuration of TracDat was also conducted in late May 2009. During Summer 2009, the core team worked on migrating some of the SLOs from different locations onto TracDat (3.33). During Summer 2009, the work of the core team also included developing training programs for faculty. The plan was to conduct a few pilot training programs for the faculty in Fall 2009, adjust the training program based on the feedback, and roll out comprehensive training for all divisions in Spring 2010. Also, the new program review format developed as a part of the Institutional Effectiveness Plan was used for the first time in Fall 2009. During Fall 2010, the campus will conduct program reviews using the new format and feed the data into TracDat so that the reports generated can be used for planning purposes (3.33). Another development that greatly improves the quality of instructional courses and programs is CurricUNET. CurricUNET allows for a smoother curriculum approval process with input from the School of Continuing Education, Fullerton College, and all concerned parties so that students have relatively timely access to new courses, certificates, and programs. CurricUNET has resulted in increased discussion about course numbers, content, and class size that may affect students on both campuses. Currently, developers are trying to coordinate so that students who enroll at either of the campuses can do so with a minimum of confusion — especially with regard to course titles, numbers, and prerequisites. Instructors creating new courses consult with the library to ensure that important supplementary materials are available to support students taking the course. Further, developers are working on a flagging system that will allow CurricUNET to flag courses that need to be reviewed and prerequisites that need to be re-validated. Also, CurricUNET includes more information regarding possible transfer status and articulation than the previous “paper-process” system. This ensures a more comprehensive articulation process for students planning to transfer to a four-year institution.

Self Evaluation The Curriculum Committee, a subcommittee of the 109

Academic Senate, is made up of faculty members and is responsible for overseeing revision and updates of course outlines and departmental programs. During the Fall semester, the committee’s focus is on approving curriculum. Issues that need discussion or investigation are placed on the committee’s list of “Issue Bin Items.” These items are then placed on Spring semester agenda to be worked on to resolve the issues. Some items necessitate a subcommittee to investigate further to determine the best course of action. Any changes are then put into the Curriculum Training Guide, added as links from the CurricUNET homepage or incorporated in the Help screens available as faculty/ curriculum committee members are actually inputting data (3.32). A key order of business is the current development of SLOs. The initial discussion of SLOs in the Fall of 2002 has led to much progress. Since that time, faculty and deans attended regional workshops to familiarize themselves with SLOs and assessment techniques, the Staff Development Coordinator facilitated meetings to encourage SLO dialogue, and an SLO Team was created, which worked with departments to map courses. Later, the SLO trainer was added to help faculty and staff learn about the SLO process. Accordingly, workshops were offered to all departments throughout Spring 2007 and Fall 2008 in 3 different areas: 1. writing SLOs and developing assessment plans, 2. analysis, Page 114: Updated chart and 3. report writing. More than 220 faculty members

Division BUS/CIS Counseling CTE Fine Arts Health Science Language-Arts Library PE SEM Social Science SUM

Total # of Courses 199 14 133 223 140 86 2 96 67 133 1093

# of Course SLOs Posted 147 14 90 221 138 70 2 95 57 90 924

# of Course CATs Posted 147 14 89 219 138 66 2 90 56 77 898

participated in these workshops (3.33, 3.80). Since 2007, the more expansive and educated SLO Team has worked diligently to oversee the development of both program and General Education and Basic Skills PLOs. As of October 2010 (Table 2), faculty members have defined SLOs for 85% of the courses, defined assessment methods for 82%, and closed the loop on 48% of all the courses (3.21).

Planning Agenda None. 2.b. The institution relies on faculty expertise and the assistance of advisory committees when appropriate to identify competency levels and measurable student outcomes for courses, certificates, programs including general and vocational education, and degrees. The institution regularly assesses student progress towards achieving those outcomes.

Descriptive Summary Each course offered at the College has been designed and implemented by relevant faculty and has an official course outline specifying course objectives. Guidelines for course syllabi ensure that students know the specific objectives of a course, its SLOs, and its criteria for successful completion. Faculty of each department continue to conduct program reviews on a regular ba-

# of Course Reports Submitted 133 10 47 48 135 48 2 22 39 39 523

# of Course Reports On TracDat 45 10 38 48 137 39 2 18 38 29 404

% SLOs Posted 74 100 68 99 99 81 100 99 85 68 85

% CATs Posted 74 100 67 98 99 77 100 94 84 58 82

% Closed Loop 67 71 35 22 96 56 100 23 58 29 48

SLO data as of this report (3.37) Table 2

Page 118

110 The College follows a program review calendar. All programs are reviewed on a three-year cycle. The following table show the semester when the program is reviewed.

Cypress College

Division Business Counseling Division Fine Arts Business Health Science Counseling Language Arts Fine Arts Physical Education Health Science SEM Language Arts Social Science Physical Education Voc/Tech (CTE) SEM College-wide Social Science

Fall 07

Spring 08

Fall 08

Spring 09

Fall 09

Spring 10

62.1

67.1

66.2

65.8

67.7

65.7

66.6 Fall 07 66.4 62.1 80.0 66.6 67.5 66.4 70.3 80.0 55.1 67.5 59.6 70.3 69.9 55.1 64.3 59.6

62.6 Spring 08 67.5 67.1 77.1 62.6 67.1 67.5 73.5 77.1 55.1 67.1 63.9 73.5 69.8 55.1 65.7 63.9

68.0 Fall 08 68.8 66.2 77.2 68.0 68.2 68.8 71.2 77.2 55.5 68.2 62.6 71.2 75.8 55.5 65.8 62.6

65.1 Spring 09 69.8 65.8 80.7 65.1 66.6 69.8 70.0 80.7 57.1 66.6 64.0 70.0 70.8 57.1 66.1 64.0

74.5 Fall 09 72.4 67.7 82.1 74.5 71.3 72.4 71.2 82.1 61.0 71.3 66.7 71.2 71.5 61.0 69.1 66.7

70.0 Spring 10 71.5 65.7 81.1 70.0 71.2 71.5 67.9 81.1 61.0 71.2 66.4 67.9 72.2 61.0 68.2 66.4

70.8

71.5

72.2

66.1

69.1

68.2

Success Rates by Division, Fall 69.92007-Spring 69.8 2010 75.8 Voc/Tech (CTE) College-wide

64.3

65.7

65.8

Counseling Division Fine Arts Business Health Science

86.0 Fall 07 81.9 76.9 88.9

80.6 Spring 79.8 08 79.2 87.0

86.8 Fall 08 81.1 80.2 87.1

84.6 Spring 82.5 09 79.8 90.4

90.2 Fall 09 84.6 80.1 90.7

89.3 Spring 83.3 10 76.0 90.6

Health SEM Science Language Arts Social Science

88.9 72.7 81.3 78.9

87.0 71.9 78.9 79.4

87.1 73.2 80.6 80.5

90.4 73.3 78.7 81.6

90.7 77.7 83.1 84.5

90.6 76.8 82.0 82.6

The tableRates showsbythe improvement in success rate over the past three years. Although the success Success Division, Fall 2007-Spring 2010 rate varies from one division to another as well as from one semester to another, there has been a Table 3 modest gain in overall student success. The more important role of this data is to provide a context forshows analysis setting benchmarks The table the and improvement in successfor rateimprovement. over the past three years. Although the success rate varies from one division to another as well as from one semester to another, there has been a modest gain in overall student The more role of 09 this data Division Fallsuccess. 07 Spring 08 important Fall 08 Spring Fallis 09to provide Spring a10 context for analysis and setting benchmarks for improvement. Business 76.9 79.2 80.2 79.8 80.1 76.0

Counseling Language Arts Fine ArtsEducation Physical

Physical Voc/TechEducation (CTE) SEM College-wide

86.0 81.3 81.9 85.6

85.6 85.9 72.7 80.3

80.6 78.9 79.8 86.9

86.9 84.4 71.9 79.6

86.8 80.6 81.1 86.3

86.3 89.1 73.2 80.9

Social Science 78.9 79.4 80.5 Retention Rates by Division, Fall 2007-Spring 2010

Voc/Tech (CTE) TableCollege-wide 4

84.6 78.7 82.5 85.2

85.2 84.9 73.3 80.8 81.6

90.2 83.1 84.6 87.4

87.4 85.7 77.7 83.7 84.5

89.3 82.0 83.3 84.7

84.7 84.5 76.8 82.0 82.6

85.9

84.4

89.1

84.9

85.7

84.5

80.3

79.6

80.9

80.8

83.7

82.0

Retention rates depict a similarFall picture. There have been moderate gains over the years although Retention Rates by Division, 2007-Spring 2010 theand result varies by division and by semester. sis make course and/or program modifications as desired or required by industries and licensure reguladeemed necessary. tions. Retention rates depict a similar picture. There have been moderate gains over the years although Data resulting from the application of SLOs are used Results of licensure examinations, employment statisthe result varies by division and by semester. tics, and basic skills improvement assessments also protogether with other measurements such as successful vide a means of evaluating the effectiveness of student course completion rates, completion of degrees and certificates, and transfers to four-year institutions for learning. For example, the Radiology & Diagnostic program review. Program review also establishes the Medical Sonography Program has advisory members connection between student achievement measured by which it reports to. It also has evaluative tools for students in clinical training, which have to be completed to the parameters mentioned above and resource requirereach competency. The program has state and national ments. In other words, accomplishment of SLOs plays an important role in identifying resources necessary for accreditation standards for both radiology (jrcert.org) and ultrasound (jrcdms.org). In addition, the Program successful continuation of programs (3.43). Advisory committees are required for all vocational utilizes employer surveys, pass rates, and graduate surveys to assess effectiveness (3.38). programs and identify specific competencies that are Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

111

Self Evaluation Faculty and advisory committees provide the essential means of assessing student learning and of ensuring that course criteria are met. While course grades and other assessment vehicles have traditionally provided the means of evaluating student success, the role of SLOs in this process has just begun. Apart from being an integral part of program review, assessment information is also published and disseminated annually via the Institutional Effectiveness Report and on the IR&P website (3.36). Since its inception, the Institutional Effectiveness Report has provided information on course completion rates and retention rates. The annual reporting is particularly useful for comparing trends over a period of time. Table 3 shows the improvement in success rate over the past three years. Although the success rate varies from one division to another as well as from one semester to another, there has been a modest gain in overall student success. The more important role of this data is to provide a context for analysis and setting benchmarks for improvement. Retention rates depict a similar picture. There have been moderate gains over the years although the result varies by division and by semester (Table 4).

Planning Agenda None. 2.c. High-quality instruction and appropriate breadth, depth, rigor, sequencing, time to completion, and synthesis of learning characterize all programs.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College demonstrates the quality of its instruction in a myriad of ways. Faculty play the key role in decisions regarding the appropriate breadth, depth, rigor, sequencing, time to completion, and synthesis of learning of programs, as overseen by the Curriculum Committee under the direction of the Academic Senate (3.39). In order to determine if a course or program is collegiate or pre-collegiate, the College uses Title 5 requirements and the new CB-21 coding rubric guidelines. 112

These guidelines help to determine whether a course is categorized as transfer level or basic skills. If it is a basic skills course, the guidelines assist in determining how many levels below transfer the course is placed (3.40). The District has also completed an in-depth review of the collegiate/pre-collegiate coding assignments to assure accuracy (3.41). Cypress College uses placement tests in math, English, and ESL to determine the baseline knowledge in basic skills of students wishing to enroll in the Collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s courses and programs. Several studies have been conducted to validate the placement cut scores, as well as identify placement and enrollment patterns and trends in levels of placement (3.51). Students who do not place into the lowest-level credit basic skills courses (Math 10 and English 57) or the intermediate ESL course (ESL 080C) are advised to consider noncredit basic skills programs. Quality of instruction is also assessed through the Program Review of instructional programs (3.42, 3.43), including a targeted review process for career technical programs. Program review now incorporates student learning outcomes, a process of defining learning outcomes, assessing student performance in relation to these outcomes, and thereby determining what areas of instruction may need change in order to facilitate student learning. Success and retention rates are also provided by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning every term by division and course so that departments can complete their program review. As this process is ongoing and cyclical, instruction is ever improving (3.44). The overall quality of instruction at Cypress College is further validated by increasing numbers of degrees awarded (3.36). Performance data is described in the annual Institutional Effectiveness Report (IER), which details success and retention rates (through time by division and by distance education status), as well as progress from one basic skills course to the next higher course, persistence rates, degrees and certificates, and transfer data (3.36). The performance of students who transfer to four-year institutions is another indication of quality of instruction â&#x20AC;&#x201D; the GPA of Cypress College students who transfer to California State University system are comparable to the overall GPA of all students in the system, as reported in the Institutional Effectiveness Report. Progress and achievement data Cypress College

are also available from a statewide accountability report (ARCC) (3.45). This report is distributed to the Board, executive staff, deans, and managers. Proper course sequencing is also evaluated. The Institutional Research and Planning office conducts research validating prerequisites, thus providing empirical support for sequencing of courses. Articulation agreements between the College and local universities also demonstrate that courses are at the correct level of breadth, depth, and rigor as equivalent courses at universities (3.46). Awards to students and programs also demonstrate high quality instruction by showing that external organizations recognize excellence among both students and faculty; the End of the Year Report (3.47) details successes in Instruction and Learning. For example, the 2009 End of the Year Report noted several successes related to quality of instruction, including a CCC Athletic Association Scholar Team Award in 2007 - 2008 to baseball and men’s golf. A Cypress College student was also named to the Women’s Basketball Academic All-Star Team. A Social Science instructor was awarded the Medal of Excellence for Teaching in 2009; that year she was also a nominee for the Cypress College and Orange County Teacher of the Year. The EOPS office named this same instructor as an Outstanding Teacher. A Cypress College Health Science student has won a research award by the American Dental Hygienists’ Association for the past two years. In the Career Technical division, the T-TEN program has been nationally ranked by Toyota as among its top performing graduates for the last six years. Also in this division, Court Reporting received an award for 30 years of excellence from the National Court Reporters’ Association (3.48). At this time, the departments, divisions, and the institution are actively involved in formulating student learning outcomes. Campus-wide Opening Day events have mandated time for departmental SLO dialogues since 2006 (3.49). The GE SLO Committee has recently completed its full draft of GE & Basic Skills PLOs (3.50).

Self Evaluation Cypress College is actively engaged in offering a quality educational experience for students and community members at large, whether transfer or non-transfer. Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

The College has begun formulating and implementing student learning outcomes in order to better monitor and evaluate course quality. By virtue of a process that uses those with expertise in their field to determine exactly what students should be able to do, and that requires the outcomes to be evaluated and potentially refined on a periodic basis, the overall quality across courses and across the curriculum is high. In short, the College uses data obtained from students, other institutions, and industry to assess the overall effectiveness of its instructional programs.

Planning Agenda None. 2.d. The institution uses delivery modes and teaching methodologies that reflect the diverse needs and learning styles of its students.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College is committed to fulfilling its Mission by maximizing accessibility to learning. To reflect the diverse needs and learning styles of students, Cypress College delivers instruction in a wide variety of modes, ranging from 18-week in-person and distance education courses offered weekdays, weekends, daytime, and evening to short-term courses and self-paced independent study programs (3.52). Evaluating and assessing all of these modes is difficult, but course outlines of record indicate an increasing commitment to addressing a variety of learning styles and student needs. Other metrics indicating that these modes and methodologies serve students include:

◊

Student demand (which has been increasing since 2003 and has substantially increased in the past two years)

◊

Success and retention rates

◊

Increased degrees and certificates awarded

◊

Gains in student satisfaction (some of which are also related to course success) and higher satisfaction than the national average (3.36, 3.87)

The College assesses students’ academic behaviors, values, and expectations through administration of the 113

College Success Factors Index (CSFI). It is currently completed in a number of basic skills courses each term to aid at-risk students in their academic performance. Analyses of these survey results have been descriptive (describing studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; behaviors and expectations), prescriptive (acknowledging strengths and weakness of individual students), and predictive (showing what behaviors or expectations are related to course success) (3.54). The College introduces new instructional delivery styles to meet student needs based upon the overall academic environment, areas of growth across the nation in specific areas such as Distance Education, and faculty expertise regarding student needs. Once a new style is introduced, careful assessment is conducted. The assessment includes comparative analysis of success and retention rates in same courses offered in different styles. For example, a comparative analysis of success and retention in online versus classroom instruction is conducted by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning (3.36). Based on the comparative data, decisions are made to offer or withdraw specific courses. The College demonstrates that it meets student needs and learning styles as evidenced by success and retention rates, number of degrees and certificates awarded, and the Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Survey (3.36, 3.87). A variety of campus activities are designed to ensure that faculty are pedagogically informed and appropriately match instructional methodologies with student needs, including required training for newly-hired tenure track instructors, required training for instructors wanting to teach distance education and webenhanced courses, and expectations that they pursue supplemental learning opportunities. Staff development opportunities have included workshops on brain research as well as cross-departmental sharing of best practices. The use of CSFI, support for attendance at conferences related to developmental education, and quality/program review of special programs all reflect the institutionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s focus on learning styles and varied modes of learning. The Collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Basic Skills/ESL Committee (BSI) has effectively provided support for departments attempting to meet diverse needs and learning styles of students. For instance, BSI equipped three computer classrooms for students in developmental reading/writing courses. 114

The committee also financed expensive software programs that allow developmental reading/writing and math students to complete self-paced, independent reinforcement activities that accommodate a variety of learning styles. Department faculty develop course methodologies based on their knowledge and expertise. A wide range of methodologies is typical for any given course to address diverse needs and learning styles. Methodologies range from lecture, demonstration, discussion, and group activities to media presentation, computerenhanced instruction, oral assignments, aural assignments, and lab assignments.

Self Evaluation Cypress College faculty and staff work together to ensure overall quality of instruction and diversity of delivery modes in such a way as to meet a variety of student needs and learning styles. By hiring faculty with expertise in their field, by encouraging ongoing professional development of faculty through Staff Development and conference participation, and by requiring that course outlines be revisited and updated every five years, the College maintains the currency of its course content, teaching methodologies, and delivery modes (3.36).

Planning Agenda None. 2.e. The institution evaluates all courses and programs through an on-going systematic review of their relevance, appropriateness, achievement of learning outcomes, currency, and future needs and plans.

Descriptive Summary Academic departments and programs, student services, campus services, and special programs systematically review and reflect on their activities to improve the quality of education and services provided to students (Table 5). Currently, the College has a three-year cycle of review for instructional programs, with approximately one-third of the programs reviewed each year (3.44). The ongoing systematic review of courses and programs consists of a loop beginning with Program Review; continuing to generation of data for General Cypress College

Program areas; linking the data to the College mission, and institution-, course-, and program-level SLOs; subsequently linking the data to resource allocation; and completing the loop by returning to the Program Review in the following cycle (3.57). This cyclical process was facilitated by the implementation of TracDat in Spring 2010. Page Program 114: Updated chart Some Reviews must meet additional crite-

Self Evaluation

The departmental program reviews are submitted to the campus Program Review Committee. The committee analyzes the report, seeks clarification, if required, and forms an overall idea as to how the program is helping students. For example, if a program reports declining student enrollment over the years, the committee questions the reasons for such decrease and the plans to reverse such trends. The commitria. Both the Health Science Division and the Career tee submits its report to the Executive Vice President Technical Education Division include outside agencies for his evaluation. Upon approval from the Executive in reviewing the quality of their programs. Nursing, for # of Vice President, the reports are archived. A summary example, must be accredited by#the of National # ofLeague # of Course of the reviews in% the Institutional Effective% % Course Course the Course Reports is included of Nursing Accrediting Commission. Likewise, Total # of SLOs CATs Closed SLOs CATs Reports On Automotive Technology program has to meet the re- ness Report (3.36). Division established Courses Posted Submitted TracDat Posted Posted Loop quirements by the Posted Bureau of Automotive BUS/CIS 199 147 147 133The program 45 review 74 process 74provides 67 the basis for inRepair and those for Automotive Service Excellence depth College analysis of the effectiveness of its proCounseling 14 14 14 10 10 100 100 71 and National Automotive Technicians Education are CTE 133 90 89 47grams and 38services.68These reviews 67 35 central to ColFoundation Fine Arts certifications. 223 221 219 48lege discussions 48 99 98 allocation 22 regarding the of resources, Science 140 138 departments 138 com- 135including137 99 resources. 96 financial 99 and human The imporOnHealth a department/program level, Language-Arts 86 70 66 48 39 81 77 56 plete a Department Planning and Review form. In de- tance of these reviews is signified each year as they are Library 2 2 2 2incorporated 2 100 regarding the into 100 College 100 discussions veloping their plan, faculty and department members PE 96 95 90 22 18 99 94 23 allocation of full-time faculty positions and in addressutilize their own expertise within their discipline in SEM 67 57 56 39 38 85 84 58 ing requests for funding. In addition, program reviews conjunction with the133 results of student learning out- 39 Social Science 90 77 29 68 58 29 a dialogue in the 82 department as well as on come other assessment data 898 including 523generate 404 SUMstatistics and 1093 924 85 48 student success and retention provided by the Office the campus regarding curriculum, student learning outcomes, student success, and resource identification. of Institutional Research and Planning. The results of Program Review are then used in the ongoing refine- The quantitative and qualitative data contribute to the ment program/course offerings such that they meet understanding of the relevancy of the program. The Pageof118 dialogue enables faculty to determine if curriculum current and future student need. The College follows a program review calendar. All programs reviewed on a three-year revieware is necessary. Linking resources with program cycle. The following table show the semester when the program is reviewed. review aids in the budget allocation process. Changes

2010…)

Program

rotation

Review

Campus Support Services: Spring semesters, every three years (2004, 2007, DPPR: One third of the programs each fall semester, programs on a three-year Student Support Services: One third of programs each fall semester, programs on a 3-year rotation

Noel-Levitz Student Survey: Fall semesters in odd-numbered years (2003, 2005, 2007…) Campus Climate Survey: Spring semesters in even-numbered years (2004, 2006, 2008…) In developing this plan, campus researchers considered surveys that might overlap in content. For example, the Noel-Levitz survey contains many items about student supports services-especially admissions and records, counseling and financial aid. The plan avoids scheduling similar surveys during the same semester.

Institutional SelfCampus Study — SpringServices 2011 Support Timeframe

(CSS)

Departmental Planning & Program Review (DPPR)

Student Support Services (SSS)

115

Timeframe Timeframe Fall 2010

Campus Support Services (CSS)

Departmental Planning & Program Review (DPPR)

Student Support Services (SSS)

Campus Support Services (CSS)

Departmental Planning & Program Review (DPPR) Group 1

Student Support Services (SSS) 1. CalWORKS 2. CARE 3. DSPS 4. EOPS 5. Library/LLRC

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

Spring 2011 Fall 2011

Accounting History Anthropology/Archaeology Journalism Art Computer Graphics Music Dental Hygiene Philosophy & Religious Studies English/Reading Photography Foreign Language Physical Science Health Information Technology Theater Arts

Group 2 1.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.

Air Conditioning & Refrigeration Ethnic Studies Airline & Travel Careers Human Services Aviation Mortuary Science Biology Nursing CIS Physical Education Counseling Psychology Dance Sociology ESL

Group 1 1. 2. 3. 4.

A&R Assessment Counseling Financial Aid (1 survey)

Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI)

Spring 2012 Fall 2012

Spring 2013

116

Campus Climate Survey of Faculty/Staff Group 3 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

1. Academic ComputingMedia Services

Art Economics Auto Collision Repair Geography/GIS Auto Technology Management/Marketing Chemistry Mathematics Communication Studies Political Science Court Reporting Psychiatric Technology Culinary Arts Radiology Technology 15. Dental Assisting

Group 1 1. Career Center 2. Transfer Center 3. Student Activities 4. Health Center 5. Library/LLRC (1 survey)

Cypress College

Spring 2013 Timeframe

1. Academic ComputingMediaSupport Services Services Campus (CSS) Media Services 2. Bookstore 3. Bursar’s Office 4. Campus Safety 5. Institutional Research 6. Maintenance & Operations 7. Staff Development 8. Production Center 9. Public Information

Fall 2013

13. Culinary Arts 14. Radiology Technology 15. Dental Assisting

Departmental Planning & Program Review (DPPR)

Student Support Services (SSS)

Group 2 1. Air Conditioning & Refrg. 2. Art 3. Chemistry 4. CIS 5. Computer Science 6. English/Reading 7. ESL 8. Ethnic Studies 9. Geography 10. Physical Education 11. Psychiatric Technology Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI)

Table 5

following program review include reducing number of High Schools report describes top feeder Page 154 seats in areas not in demand, increasing seats for high high schools (3.36). demand programs, and exploring ways to improve stu ◊ Three-year Follow-up of Cypress Coldent success. Climate Survey conducted in Fall 2009 indicate that the employee ratings lege regarding Students, the alsogeneral known as Student atmosphere has improved since the last survey Compared InCollege this systematic assessment of its effectiveness in conducted in Spring Right 2008. to Know (SRTK),toshows degree the 2008student study, goals more employees the College to and supporting meeting and needs, felt the that College utilizes has a strong commitment attainment transfers , including thatreports addresssuch issues relevant to gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgender employees adiversity variety ofactivities studies and as the following: identifying top transfer institutions (3.59). and students. A substantial portion of the survey focused on employees’ perceptions of how ◊ the TheCollege Institutional Report responsive is to itsEffectiveness diverse students and staff. The following chart shows the ratings Planning Agenda student and stafftodemographgiven by theincludes respondents in relation questions on diversity. ics, institutional outcomes, and quality None. review results (3.36). 2.f. The institution engages in ongoing, sys ◊ Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventematic evaluation and integrated planning to tory is based on the fact that satisfaction assure currency and measure achievement of is related to student performance (3.36). its stated student learning outcomes for courses, certificates, programs including general ◊ The Climate Survey of Faculty and Staff and vocational education, and degrees. The gathers information regarding Cypress institution systematically strives to improve College employees’ opinions on job satthose outcomes and makes the results availisfaction, diversity, and decision-making able to appropriate constituencies. (3.36).

◊

The Academic Characteristics and Enrollment Patterns of Students from Local

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

117

Descriptive Summary The College systematically engages in instructional program review, which is integrated with institutional planning in order to better achieve student learning outcomes. As individual departments and programs complete program reviews and quality assurance evaluations, using such data as Student Learning Outcome assessments or the Institutional Effectiveness Report (3.36), this information is used to develop action plans that are, in turn, directly linked on an institutional level to the College’s Strategic Plan and the Educational and Facilities Master Plans, for example. Such integration allows the College to better determine the allocation and use of its resources to better serve students and the community. The progress of the College in defining, assessing, and reporting on SLOs over the last eight years attests to its commitment to long-term integration and utilization of SLOs for student success. With the advent of TracDat for housing and linking SLO data with other campus plans, the effective use of data from a variety of sources will enhance each department or program’s ability to determine appropriate directions, goals, and action plans.

Self Evaluation The College continues to engage in systematic self evaluation in order to best accomplish its mission. As departments and programs have instituted SLOs, for example, they have already begun a cyclical review of SLOs to assure currency. Such review data is used to evaluate the department/program’s needs in light of institutional goals and planning. Since 2009, program review forms for instruction, student services, and campus support services have reflected the link between SLOs and allocation of fiscal resources (3.76, 3.77). The establishment by the Academic Senate of an SLO Assessment Committee in Spring of 2010 will further ensure that SLO assessment results are used in program planning and revision. Assessment Committee members consist of the SLO Coordinator, SLO Facilitator, and three faculty members. The committee is charged with providing feedback to respective faculty regarding SLO assessment results. Faculty members are required to respond to each of the recommendations based on 118

the following three options:

1. Accept the recommendation and indicate if the recommendation will be implemented during the current assessment cycle.

Accept the recommendation and indicate that it will be implemented in the next assessment cycle.

Provide an explanation of why the recommendation does not apply.

Recommendations by the SLO Assessment Committee and responses by faculty members are documented in TracDat to provide future reference (3.23). The full implementation of TracDat is expected to help the College accomplish its goals of implementing and integrating SLO assessment with planning and program review by 2012. Such review data is used to evaluate the department/program’s needs in light of institutional goals and planning.

Planning Agenda None. 2.g. If an institution uses departmental course and/or program examinations, it validates their effectiveness in measuring student learning and minimizes test biases.

Descriptive Summary The English Department’s English 60 departmental exam was eliminated in 2005 in light of the development of specific student learning outcomes measurements. Cypress College does not make use of departmental course exams. Students in many Health Science Division take externally administered examinations for certification and licensing; however, these exams are not used as part of the programs’ internal student evaluations.

Self Evaluation At this time, the College has no departmental course and/or program examinations.

Cypress College

Planning Agenda

Descriptive Summary

None.

The primary means of addressing issues related to credit is through the College Curriculum Committee. Its rigorous process of curriculum review focuses upon issues of unit equivalencies, articulation, and certifications. Each degree and certificate program undergoes in-depth review on a regular basis to verify viability and appropriateness. Student performance standards for credit courses are established by faculty, confirmed by the Curriculum Committee, and clearly communicated to students through course outlines and syllabi.

Faculty engage in rigorous and well-defined processes to establish meaningful degree and certificate programs in the interest of advancing the College mission. As the process of establishment of student learning outcomes for all of its courses and programs continues, the connection between successful student achievement as evidenced in the attainment of degrees and certificates and transfers to four-year colleges and universities is becoming increasingly connected to stated learning outcomes. Major requirements are established by faculty of each of the College programs offering associates degrees through the regular curriculum process. General education requirements are established and maintained through an ongoing dialogue engaged primarily at the Curriculum Committee in consideration of State regulations and System standards. Certificate requirements are established collaboratively with program representatives significantly informed via the engagement of community and private industry advisory boards.

Self Evaluation

The curriculum process follows Title 5 regulations and State criteria. Units are determined in accord with standards established Title 5, section 55002.5, of the California Code of Regulations. All course outlines specify any prerequisites, the objectives of the course, course activities, unit assignments for the course, and course materials. Each department has formulated student learning outcomes for specific courses and lists them on the course syllabi.

All degree and certificate requirements are clearly communicated by means of the Cypress College printed catalog, online catalog, and on program websites and/ or printed brochures.

2.h. The institution awards credit based on student achievement of the course’s stated learning outcomes. Units of credit awarded are consistent with institutional policies that reflect generally accepted norms or equivalencies in higher education.

Descriptive Summary

Faculty within every College department and program conducts Program Review on a regular basis, at which time student performance standards are re-examined and re-affirmed. In addition, individual faculty review serves to verify the individual faculty member’s understanding of and compliance with required student performance levels.

Planning Agenda None. 2.i. The institution awards degrees and certificates based on student achievement of a program’s stated learning outcomes.

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

New courses or programs must go through the Curriculum Committee approval process, which requires clearly stated instructional goals and student learning outcomes. In addition, Cypress College has instituted student learning outcomes in its existing courses to further clarify required student achievement levels. Consequently, students have clear access to requirements for completion of their degree or certificate. Students wishing to graduate must file a petition with Office of Admissions and Records to ensure that they have met such requirements. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning publishes data on degrees/certificates issued and also on transfer rates (3.90).

Planning Agenda None. 119

3. The institution requires of all academic and vocational degree programs a component of general education based on a carefully considered philosophy that is clearly stated in its catalog. The institution, relying on the expertise of its faculty, determines the appropriateness of each course for inclusion in the general education curriculum by examining the stated learning outcomes for the course.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College states its philosophy for General Education in the 2009-2010 College Catalog, page 51 (3.9).

education criteria through the curriculum development process. In addition to meeting standards for AA/ AS degrees or certificates, close communication with transfer institutions confirms that general education courses will satisfy UC and/or IGETC requirements. Also, the Articulation Officer reviews all curriculum as a required step in the CurricUNET approval process to ensure that requirements have been met (3.24). The development of GE & Basic Skills PLOs and the Institutional Learning Outcomes (ILOs) will help the College determine the ongoing quality of its courses and programs.

The General Education & Basic Skills Program Learning Outcomes Committee finalized a draft of Cypress College General Education and Basic Skills Program Learning Outcomes (3.50), which was approved by the Academic Senate in Spring 2010 (3.92).

Planning Agenda

In order for a course to be included on the general education list, it must meet specific criteria established by the Cypress College Curriculum Committee. Criteria, found in the Training Guide on the CurriUNET homepage (3.24) are: A course must fulfill all criteria in Category I: (A) It must contain a body of knowledge that educated people have in common; (B) It must present the fundamental principles of a discipline; (C) Its coverage must be broad in scope rather than specialized; and (D) It must enhance critical evaluation and critical thinking. In addition, a course must meet at least one criterion from Category II: (A) It is helpful to students in examining, evaluating, and expressing the principles of a discipline; (B) It integrates knowledge; (C) It develops clear and effective communication skills; and (D) It promotes understanding of diverse cultures. During its course review process, the Curriculum Committee provides faculty with explanations as to why a course has not met the criteria and what can be done to correct it, or why the course is not appropriate for general education.

3.a. An understanding of the basic content and methodology of the major areas of knowledge: areas include the humanities and fine arts, the natural sciences, and the social sciences.

Rationale for general education is communicated to both students and faculty via the Cypress College Catalog, the College website, and CurricUNET (3.9, 3.1, 3.24).

Self Evaluation The College ensures quality of instruction and general 120

None. General education has comprehensive learning outcomes for the students who complete it, including the following:

Descriptive Summary Cypress College offers a variety of General Education courses designed to introduce students to the many ways people comprehend the modern world. The subject matter presented in general education courses is designed to be broad, and frequently introductory, rather than specialized, narrow, or advanced. These courses, offered in various formats such as full and halfsemester, on-campus, online and hybrid, form a pattern of learning experiences designed to develop the following insights and capacities in all students regardless of their ultimate educational goals:

◊

Knowledge of the common principles, concepts, and modes of inquiry in the major disciplines;

◊

Appreciation and understanding of the environment, culture, society, and self;

◊

Ability to think and communicate clearly and effectively, critically, and ethically both orally and in writing;

◊

Proficiency in mathematics, natural sciences, and analytical thinking; Cypress College

◊

Understanding of the political and economic environment in order to be better informed and more responsible citizens;

◊

Desire to continue education throughout their lives (3.9)

Cypress College currently offers General Education courses in the areas of humanities and fine arts (106), the natural sciences (51), mathematics (17), and the social sciences (78), to help students develop foundational skills towards the completion of AA/AS degrees, certification programs, and the Intersegmental General Education Transfer Curriculum (IGETC). Students entering Cypress College in Fall 1995, or later, must complete 25 units of General Education (of the total 60 degree-applicable units required for the Associate Degree) taken from the following areas:

◊

Language and Rationality: Written Communication (a minimum of 3 units); Analytical thinking (a minimum of 3 units)

◊

Natural Sciences and Mathematics: Life Sciences and Physical Sciences (a minimum of 3 units); Mathematics (a minimum of 3 units)

◊

Arts and Humanities: Arts (a minimum of 3 units); Humanities (a minimum of 3 units)

Completion of all the requirements in the Intersegmental General Education Transfer Curriculum (IGETC) will permit a student to transfer from Cypress College to a campus in either the California State University or the University of California system without the need, after transfer, to take additional lower division general education courses to satisfy campus general education requirements.

Self Evaluation The faculty and administrators on the Curriculum Committee rigorously evaluate and review all existing, revised, and newly introduced courses to ensure that they meet the general education standards and adhere to the requirements for articulation with CSU and UC (3.24). All divisions are currently engaged in the SLO process, which includes developing and assessing SLOs and PLOs and mapping course SLOs to at least one of the GE & Basic Skills PLOs. The final draft of Cypress College General Education and Basic Skills Program Learning Outcomes, as finalized by the GE & Basic Skills PLO Committee, was approved by the Academic Senate in Spring 2010 (3.60, 3.92). It included the following GE & Basic Skills PLOs relevant to breadth of knowledge and experience: I. Breadth of Knowledge and Experiences

◊

Social Sciences (6 units)

Students will possess a breadth of knowledge and experiences from the following areas:

◊

Physical Activity and Health (1 unit)

◊

Proficiency in reading may be satisfied by completing a college-level reading course with a satisfactory score on the Cypress College reading proficiency test, and is required for California State University (CSU) general education certificate, IGETC certification, and a Bachelor’s degree from a regionally accredited institution (3.9).

1. Aesthetic Awareness: Examine the visual arts, dance, music, and/or literature of diverse cultures.

Students planning to transfer to one of the campuses of the California State University system must complete a minimum of 48 semester units in General Education breadth courses. Cypress College is permitted to certify completion of the lower division 39-unit general education requirement (3.1, 3.9).

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

A. Humanities and the Arts

2. Critical Analysis: Assess the methods used to create art and interpret its literal and/or symbolic meaning. 3. Creativity: Engage in artistic creative endeavors.

B. Natural Sciences and Mathematics

1. Scientific Principles: Demonstrate an understanding of scientific principles that govern the natural and physical universe.

121

2. The Scientific Method: Apply scientific processes to solve problems and measure and observe natural phenomena, including the design, performance, and analysis of experiments. 3. Mathematical Systems: Demonstrate an understanding of mathematics as a symbolic, universal language.

C. Social Sciences

1. Cultural Competence: Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the feelings, opinions, and/or values of other people and cultures 2. Global Perspective: Recognize important economic, political, social, and historical issues and values in one’s own community, state, country, and/or the world. 3. Human Experience: Use qualitative and/or quantitative methods to study the human aspects of the world.

D. Physical Education

1. Fitness: Understand the development, care, and exercise of the human body through movement. 2. Health and Nutrition: Understand and apply the principles of nutrition, hygiene, and safety to develop mental and physical well being. 3. Movement Competence: learned skills competently.

Perform

Planning Agenda None. 3.b. A capability to be a productive individual and life long learner: skills include oral and written communication, information competency, computer literacy, scientific and quantitative reasoning, critical analysis/logical thinking, and the ability to acquire knowledge through a variety of means.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College general education course structure is inclusive of courses that have been designed for students with the goals of earning associate degrees as well as transferring to four-year institutions (UC and CSU). These courses provide well-rounded instruction in oral and written communication skills, information competency, computer literacy, scientific and quantitative reasoning, critical analysis and logical thinking, and, the ability to acquire knowledge through a variety of means. The general education courses offered at Cypress College are designed to introduce students to various pathways of learning and the means and resources that can be used to become a life-long learner; to help students develop effective oral and written communication; to think clearly and logically; to acquire competency in gaining and retaining relevant information by applying technology as well as traditional sources; to understand scientific principles and methods of inquiry; and to develop creative skills and social awareness.

Self Evaluation Cypress College General Education & Basic Skills Program Learning Outcomes, as finalized by the GE & Basic Skills PLO Committee, were approved by the Academic Senate in Spring 2010 (3.60, 3.92). It includes the following GE & Basic Skills PLOs relevant to communication and critical thinking competency: II. Communication Students will communicate effectively, which means the ability to

A. Read:

1. Comprehend, interpret, and/or evaluate various written information.

B. Write:

1. Communicate thoughts, ideas, information, and messages in writing. 2. Compose and create documents with correct grammar, spelling, punctuation, and appropriate language, style, and format. 3. Check, edit, and revise written work for correct information, appropriate em-

122

Cypress College

phasis, form, style, and grammar.

C. Listen:

1. Sense and appropriately perceive and respond to verbal and/or nonverbal messages.

D. Communicate:

1. Organize ideas and communicate verbal and/or non-verbal messages appropriate to the audience and the situation. 2. Communicate clearly and ask relevant questions in conversations, discussions, group activities, and/or public speaking. III. Critical Thinking and Information Competency Students will think critically, which is characterized by the ability to

A. Analyze:

1. Recognize and apply rules and principles to new situations. 2. Use logic (induction and deduction) to draw conclusions from information given. 3. Differentiate between facts, inferences, assumptions, and/or conclusions.

B. Compute:

1. Use basic numerical concepts, such as whole numbers, percentages, and estimates of math without a calculator. 2. Use tables, graphs, charts, and diagrams to explain concepts or ideas. 3. Use basic geometrical shapes, such as lines, angles, shapes, and space.

C. Research:

1. Effectively and ethically acquire, organize, analyze, synthesize, evaluate, and communicate information. 2. Determine which technology resources will produce the desired results

D. Solve Problems:

1. Define a problem and identify its components. Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

2. Create a plan of action to resolve the issue. 3. Execute and evaluate the effectiveness of the plan.

Planning Agenda None. 3.c. A recognition of what it means to be an ethical human being and effective citizen: qualities include an appreciation of ethical principles, civility and interpersonal skills; respect for cultural diversity; historical and aesthetic sensitivity; and the willingness to assume civic, political, and social responsibilities locally, nationally, and globally.

Descriptive Summary As an educational community, Cypress College embraces the shared characteristics as well as the diverse intellectual viewpoints and ideas of its culturally rich population. To prepare students to meet the challenges of increasingly diverse campus and work environments, selected academic courses are designed to: 1) foster respect for diverse populations; 2) assist students in understanding and critically evaluating personal biases; and 3) encourage students to apply the knowledge gained in these courses in their daily lives. The general education program at Cypress College prepares students to develop as effective, ethical, and socially responsible human beings. To achieve these educational goals, Cypress College requires all students to take at least one course that emphasizes the United States or focuses specifically on issues such as race, gender, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, socio-economic background, physical and mental ability, and how they impact the struggles of people to achieve civil and human rights (3.9).

Self Evaluation The final draft of Cypress College General Education & Basic Skills Program Learning Outcomes, as finalized by the GE & Basic Skills PLO Committee, were approved by the Academic Senate in Spring 2010 (3.60). It includes the following GE & Basic Skills PLOs relevant to being an ethical human being and responsible citizen: 123

IV. Self Development Students will develop self-awareness and responsibility by means of the following:

A. Self Integration

1. Understand the person as an integrated physiological, social, and psychological being.

B. Personal Responsibility

1. Develop skills and identify values for personal growth and life-long learning.

C. Global Citizenship

1. Understand the interconnection between current events, ethics, and personal and societal choices within our world.

Planning Agenda None. 4. All degree programs include focused study in at least one area of inquiry or in an established interdisciplinary core.

Descriptive Summary Each of Cypress College’s degree programs include focused study in at least one area of inquiry or in an established interdisciplinary core. Requirements for the AA degree in an area of inquiry typically include the successful completion of all major requirements, elective requirements, and general education requirements. For associate degrees in an area of inquiry, students must successfully complete courses established through the curriculum process as significantly related to the area of focus, general education requirements, and electives.

Self Evaluation The overall requirement for an AA or AS degree is 60 units total with a cumulative grade point average of 2.0: 24 units as stipulated by the Cypress College graduation requirements plus 1 unit of Physical Education; 39 units as stipulated by the CSU general education certification requirements or 37-39 units as stipulated by the IGETC. For the major, a student must achieve 124

a grade of “C” or better in each course attempted that is counted for the major or area of study. A “C-” does not satisfy this requirement. For each area of emphasis, a student must complete a minimum of 18 units (3.9).

Planning Agenda None. 5. Students completing vocational and occupational certificates and degrees demonstrate technical and professional competencies that meet employment and other applicable standards and are prepared for external licensure and certification.

Descriptive Summary Accrediting and licensing agencies provide information to departments regarding the performance of Cypress College students on their examinations. Departments maintain and make available the statistical data as needed. Graduates of many of the training programs are required to take licensure exam(s) to determine their competence in the field before they are allowed to become practitioners in the field. The agencies performing the testing keep records of the pass rates of each school. Cypress College has performed well above the state average in many areas. Advisory committees are required for all vocational programs and identify specific competencies that are desired or required by industries and licensure regulations. Results of licensure examinations, employment statistics, and basic skills improvement assessments also provide a means of evaluating the effectiveness of student learning. For example, within the Dental Assistant Program at Cypress College, Dental Assisting has a national examination in order to receive the Certified Dental Assistant CDA Certificate as well as a state examination for the Registered Dental Assistant RDA License. Students are eligible to take the examinations after they have earned a Certificate of Completion for the Dental Assisting Program (3.61).

Self Evaluation Table 6 lists representative licensure pass rates for Cypress College graduates by program (3.62).

Cypress College

Program Nursing (RN)

Licensure Exam

Pass Rate

NCLEX-RN, Board of Registered Nursing

2007/08: 97% (89 students) 2008/09: 94% (100 students) 2009/10: 95% (83 students)

Health Information Technology Program

Registered Health Information Technician 2006: 86% (through the American Information Management 2007: 100% Association) 2008: 75% 2009: 80%

Psychiatric Technician Program

Board of Vocational Nurses and Psychiatric Technicians

2010: 85%

Mortuary Science

National Board Examination (for graduation) California State Embalmer Licensing Exam

2009/10: 88% for first-time test takers

Radiologic Technology Program

American Registry of Radiologic Technologists

2006: 97% 2007: 91% 2008: 100% 2009: 100%

Diagnostic Medical Sonography Program

American Registry of Diagnostic Medical Sonography

2006: Abdomen - 100%; OB/GYN - 100%; Physics - 67% 2007: Abdomen - 67%; OB/GYN - 100%; Physics - 100% 2009: Abdomen - 75%; OB/GYN - 100%; Physics - 89%

Registered Dental Assisting Program

RDA Licensure

Practical: 80% first time takers

California Registered Dental Assisting Certification Examination

Not a Licensure; it is a certification. CDA-Certified Dental Assistant

2009: 100%

Dental Hygiene

Dental hygiene National Board Exam

2009: 100%

Court Reporting

Certified Shorthand Reporterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Exam (CSR). 100% This is a three-part test given three times a year. The machine portion is at 200 wpm. The academic portion covers English and Professional Practice.

Written: 92% first time takers

Table 6

In addition, the job placement rate of students graduating from the Career Technical Education was above 80% (3.36). The high pass rates in licensure examinations and high job placement rates indicate that the programs prepare students for successful employment. The involvement of local industries such as Toyota and Dental Clinics indicate that local employers are satisfied with the students of Cypress College.

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

Planning Agenda None. 6. The institution assures that students and prospective students receive clear and accurate information about educational courses and programs and transfer policies. The institution describes its degrees and certificates in terms of their purpose, content, course re125

quirements, and expected student learning outcomes. In every class section students receive a course syllabus that specifies learning objectives consistent with those in the institutionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s officially approves course outlines.

Descriptive Summary The College assures that students and prospective students receive clear and accurate information about educational courses and programs and transfer policies through the College Catalog. The print version is published yearly for July 1st distribution. The College Catalog is available in hardcopy format and on the College website (3.9). The College Catalog provides a clear and accurate description of degrees and certificate programs. Degree and program information is reviewed yearly before publication in order to verify the accuracy of content and requirements. This review process is campus wide and includes matriculation and articulation officers, division deans, program directors, managers, department chairs, and faculty. The online version of the College Catalog is updated if an addendum is needed in order to maintain updated accuracy if changes in program and degree requirements occur after the yearly print publication. Students, prospective students, and the general public can access program and certificate descriptions and requirements through the College website via the online College Catalog, as well as links to specific academic and certificate programs. PLOs are included in the 2010-2011 Catalog. As of October 2010, 26 out of 31 programs, including the GE & Basic Skills Program, have defined their PLOs, and the projected completion date for the remaining five programs is Spring 2011. A login name is required to review course outlines and completed SLOs. As of October 2010, faculty members have defined SLOs for 85% of courses, defined assessment methods for 82%, and closed the loop on 48% of all courses. The projected completion date of all individual course SLOs is Spring 2011 (3.64). All full-time faculty and adjunct faculty must create a syllabus for each course section being taught. This course syllabus must be distributed to students at the first class meeting. Orientations for new faculty and for adjunct faculty are given in order to ensure that the required elements of the syllabus are adhered to. All 126

course syllabi include SLOs, attendance and grading policies, prerequisites, course materials, course objectives, academic honesty policy, and information about student services. All faculty members were notified that SLOs became a requirement on all syllabi starting Spring 2010. The Curriculum Committee revised the syllabus guidelines during Spring 2010 to include SLOs, distance education elements, and other necessary information. The revised Syllabus Guidelines document as well as a Checklist were approved by the Academic Senate in Spring 2010. The Curriculum chair emailed the document to all full-time and adjunct faculty and deans. They have replaced the old syllabus guidelines on the College J: drive (3.65, 3.66). In order to ensure that individual course sections follow established learning objectives, all instructors are required to submit a copy of their course syllabi to their respective division deans. This is required at the beginning of each semester for each class taught. Contractually mandated evaluations of both full-time faculty and adjunct faculty include a review of individual course syllabi in order to ensure that each document includes specified course requirements and SLOs as of Spring 2010.

Self Evaluation The College assures that all students and all prospective students receive clear and accurate information about educational courses and programs and transfer policies. The College Catalog makes this information available in both print version and on the College website. Students also receive individual course syllabi that contain prerequisite information, course objectives, and expected learning outcomes. As of Spring 2010, all instructors are required to include approved student learning outcomes in each of their course syllabi (3.66). Full-time faculty and adjunct faculty are required to submit a copy of each course syllabi to their respective dean for review. In addition, the mandated faculty evaluations also ensure that course syllabi adhere to the requirements and provide clear, accurate, and reliable information (3.93).

Planning Agenda None. 6.a. The institution makes available to its students clearly stated transfer-of-credit policies Cypress College

in order to facilitate the mobility of students without penalty. In accepting transfer credits to fulfill degree requirements, the institution certifies that the expected learning outcomes for transferred courses are comparable to the learning outcomes of its own courses. Where patterns of student enrollment between institutions are identified, the institution develops articulation agreements as appropriate to it mission.

Descriptive Summary The College accepts transfer coursework from accredited institutions based on information from the American Council on Education: Postsecondary Education. Articulation agreements with the CSUs and the UCs are kept current and renewed annually by the College Articulation Officer. Transfer information is available to students and the general public in the College Catalog (3.9), Schedule of Classes (3.10), through ASSIST.org, and through printed information available in both the Transfer Center and the Counseling Center (3.67). Admissions and Records evaluators and Counselors are trained to work together in order to ensure that students receive consistently accurate information that reflects the official policies stated in the Catalog. Monthly workgroup meetings also coordinate current and up-todate communication of policies and procedures to students. In 2008 and 2009, the College conducted a pilot program of mandatory orientation for new students. It began with a cohort of students from the Collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s eleven top feeder high schools. The pilot required students to attend an on campus or online orientation in order to receive information about degrees, programs, transfer programs, and vocational programs. They also received an earlier Fall registration date as an incentive to attend the orientation in June or July prior to Fall registration (3.94, 3.95, 3.96). The College Transfer Center also offers specialized transfer information to students through Trip Tic, a personalized booklet created for individual students based on a specific major. The Trip Tic booklet describes transfer information and guidelines for a selected university. Information about Trip Tic is available in the Transfer Center and on the College website Transfer Center link (3.68, 3.69). Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

Courses completed at another college or university outside of the U.S. are evaluated by an off-campus evaluation service: http://www.naces.org/. Evaluations need to be course-by-course with grades and units. This information is available to students in the College Catalog and on the College website (3.9, 3.1). The College follows the statewide guidelines of acceptance of Advance Placement (AP) credit. This information is available in the print Catalog and the online Catalog, and it is reviewed annually by the College Articulation Officer. A College policy is also in place for specific certificate programs and occupational degrees. The military credit policy was updated in the 2009 Catalog, which ensures alignment with the new CSU policies (3.67).

Self Evaluation The College provides clearly stated transfer-of-credit policies in order to facilitate consistent student mobility. Articulation agreements with public institutions are kept current, and the process ensures that expected learning outcomes are comparable between institutions. Articulation agreements with private institutions are also maintained based on current data. The College provides many ways in which students, prospective students, and the general public can access articulation information. This information is available in the print and online versions of the College Catalog and Schedule of Classes, the Counseling and Transfer center web pages on the College website, and through direct materials, classes, and workshops provided by the Transfer Center and the Counseling Center.

Planning Agenda None. 6.b. When programs are eliminated or program requirements are significantly changed, the institution makes appropriate arrangements so that enrolled students may complete their education in a timely manner with a minimum of disruption.

Descriptive Summary The issues of program elimination (discontinuance) and significant change to program requirements are addressed in differentÂ venues. The elimination of pro127

grams is a matter subject to provisions of Board Policy (BP 2510) and Administrative Procedures (AP 2510) (3.15). In accord with provisions of California Assembly Bill 1725 (Vasconcellos,1985) (3.79), Program Discontinuance is a matter subject to agreement between the academic senates of the District and the Board of Trustees. Specifically, this is a matter upon which the Trustees must reach mutual agreement with the senates. Significant changes to program requirements are addressed through the regular campus process of curriculum review. Following approval of proposed changes by the College Curriculum Committee, the changes are reviewed by the District Curriculum Coordinating Committee (DCCC). Subsequently, such changes are agendized and presented for consideration to the Board of Trustees at regularly scheduled Board meetings. Significant changes in program requirements rarely occur. In the event that significant changes should occur, students are advised of the options that are available to them through modifications in the Catalog and Schedule of Classes, information distributed by program directors and program instructors, by counselors at the Counseling Center, and by representatives of the College at the Transfer Center. In addition, students who maintain continuous enrollment retain their catalog rights and are thus protected against undue impact of program changes.

Self Evaluation Significant changes to programs occur upon the initiation by program faculty of the curriculum process of the College. Initiating faculty are expected to engage in program/department-level conversations prior to advancement to the division level. Once recommendations for needed changes are finalized at the division level, the required curriculum is input into the curriculum process (CurricUNET) for technical review, review by cross-District programs that may be impacted, and sign-off by Curriculum Committee representatives, the Executive Vice President of the College, and the President of the College (3.24). Once approved, the changes are submitted for review to DCCC. If the proposed curriculum receives DCCC approval, it is next presented to the Board of Trustees for review and adoption. The College’s processes are effective in maintaining the integrity of its curriculum. The mechanisms utilized to assure communication to students of signifi128

cant program changes assure that the information students need to engage in effective academic planning is readily available in a variety of locales. The program elimination (discontinuance) process is fundamentally a District-level responsibility. The issue has been taken up at Chancellor’s Cabinet, the body responsible for the maintenance and revision of District Policy and Procedures, for the last four years. Representatives of the academic senate have been active participants in those discussions. Efforts to develop and adopt a policy to address the need for effective program monitoring and elimination when necessary have come up against significant institutional inertia.

Planning Agenda None. 6.c. The institution represents itself clearly, accurately, and consistently to prospective and current students, the public, and its personnel through its catalogs, statements, and publications, including those presented in electronic formats. It regularly reviews institutional policies, procedures, and publications to assure integrity in all representations about its mission, programs, and services.

Descriptive Summary The College Schedule of Classes, Catalog, specific program information, and other printed publications provide consistent, clear, and accurate information to current students, prospective students, the public, and District personnel. This information is also easily accessible through the College website. In addition, previous Catalogs and Schedules of Classes are also available through the College website (3.9, 3.10). Each Catalog and Schedule of Classes is reviewed by the matriculation officer, the articulation officer, curriculum representatives, program directors, deans, managers, department chairs, and faculty. A second review process is always conducted before printing occurs. The Schedule of Classes is printed three times a year for fall, spring, and summer course offerings. The Catalog is printed yearly. The College website has comprehensive program descriptions and contact information that are available to both students and the general public. Cypress College

The Cypress College Public Information Office is responsible for internal and external communications, as well as the areas of public relations and marketing. For the past decade, the office has published the @Cypress newsletter on behalf of the President (3.70). The newsletter is produced each week during the Fall and Spring semesters. The @Cypress newsletter is distributed to all campus employees, posted to the College website, shared on Facebook and Twitter, and emailed to a group of recipients that includes retirees, District employees, members of the media, Foundation Board members, and other constituents. In addition to the production of @Cypress in the Public Information Office, the document is reviewed for accuracy and currency by the President and the President’s executive assistant. @Cypress regularly contains stories on student achievement. In addition to @Cypress, information about student achievement can be found in the College’s annual End of the Year Report. Along with print distribution, this document is also shared on the College website (3.47, 3.72).

and alumni.

In the mid-2000s, the Public Information Office initiated a comprehensive communications program focused on connecting with students via email. While the primary purpose was to foster enrollment, these personalized direct email newsletters also have contained messages related to student awards.

None.

Another method of providing information comes through the myGateway portal where students can receive both email and “personal message channel” notifications (3.85). Finally, select stories about student achievement are also shared with members of the media via news releases (3.72).

Self Evaluation In recent years, Cypress College has taken a proactive and leading role in the use of social media to communicate about the College’s success, including the success of its students, faculty, and alumni. During the period between accreditation visits, the College has utilized a variety of social media methods, including Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, iTunes Podcasts, and MySpace. The focus of these endeavors has primarily been in conveying information that fosters student success and student participation as well as highlighting the success of students, faculty, Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

The Public Information Office initiated a blog in Fall 2010. While the technology itself is not revolutionary at this point, the philosophical change it represents is. The @Cypress newsletter had been the driving force for communicating information about the college — including its students, employees, and achievements. The implementation of the blog shifts news dissemination to an information-sharingcentric model that takes place on a daily time scale (or even up-to-the-minute, if events warrant). The blog will eventually become a central repository for information, which is currently scattered in various locations, including Facebook, Twitter, and even alluser email. In turn, the best of the blog then becomes the content for the @Cypress newsletter. In short, the news itself becomes the driver, rather than the production of the newsletter.

Planning Agenda 7. In order to assure the academic integrity of the teaching-learning process, the institution uses and makes public governing boardadopted policies on academic freedom and responsibility, student academic honesty, and specific institutional beliefs or worldviews. These policies make clear the institution’s commitment to the free pursuit and dissemination of knowledge.

Descriptive Summary The North Orange County Community College District has recently implemented a Board policy BP/AP 4030 outlining broad freedoms for classroom instructors regarding in-class speech and discussion (3.15). The faculty at Cypress College have engaged in extended dialogue related to the distinction between personal conviction and appropriate topics within a particular discipline. Discussions district-wide have led to the adoption of a policy on academic freedom in February 2008. BP/AP 4030 is currently in agreement with both the full-time and adjunct faculty labor unions (3.73). Cypress College Academic Senate has had discussions with the Chancellor’s office to design a draft to ensure 129

the right of faculty and students to teach and learn in a supportive environment (3.15). The goal is to balance academic freedom with exploration of difficult questions that could be disquieting to some students. BP/ AP 4030 makes it clear that the instructor can introduce and discuss controversial topics, as long as the presentation of this material involves objective reasoning, rational discussion, and pertains to course content (3.15).

Self Evaluation The Board Policy makes reference to the issue of faculty speaking as private citizens. The Board Policy makes it clear that the faculty member can speak and write freely as a citizen and should be free from institutional censorship or discipline but should state that personal comments in no way reflect the opinions of NOCCCD. BP/AP 4030 clearly states that there is an appropriate time, place, and manner for expressing personal convictions as private citizens (3.15).

Planning Agenda None. 7.b. The institution establishes and publishes clear expectations concerning students academic honesty and consequences for dishonesty.

demic honesty as it relates to online instruction as new technologies become available. Course syllabi, distributed at the beginning of every semester, are the primary method of informing students regarding the expectations the instructor has for them for the successful completion of their course. Academic honesty policies are expected to follow existing District policies found in the College Catalog, Deans’ offices, Student Services’ office and the District office. Finally, the policies and procedures for disciplining any student who has violated the policy on academic honesty are clearly set out in both Administrative Procedures and in the College Catalog (3.15, 3.9).

Self Evaluation Information regarding student academic honesty policy is clearly delineated in the College Catalog and other campus publications (3.9). Cypress College has not recently surveyed student or faculty positions on matters of accessible information regarding the policy of student academic honesty and related consequences if the student is found to have violated that policy. While Cypress College has made its position clear to the faculty and its students on the matter of academic honesty, there are some concerns of how to implement these policies as students’ rights evolve in the coming years.

Planning Agenda

Descriptive Summary

None.

The Cypress College Administrative Procedures handbook clearly delineates the policies and guidelines concerning student academic honesty and related outcomes (3.15). The policy is also available in the College Catalog (both print and online versions), instructors’ course syllabi, the College and District web sites, and the Student Handbook (3.9, 3.15, 3.75). The College has a set of web and print pages dedicated to informing students about existing academic standards and student conduct policies. This page was created to give students clear definitions of plagiarism and academic dishonesty and outlines consequences for these transgressions (3.75).

7.c. Institutions that require conformity to specific codes of conduct of staff, faculty, administrators, or students, or that seek to instill specific beliefs or world views, give clear prior notice of such policies, including statements in the catalog and/or appropriate faculty or student handbooks.

Faculty members use online programs such as Turnitin.com as a method of monitoring and discouraging plagiarized essay or term-paper assignments. The College plans to continue to address concerns about aca130

Descriptive Summary Cypress College is a public institution; all of its agreed upon policies and ethical codes of conduct are a reflection of its Mission, Vision, and Philosophy Statements (3.9). Unlike private institutions or colleges that are funded by the donations of religious or political organizations, Cypress College does not seek to instill specific beliefs or world views in its students nor require them of faculty and staff. Cypress College

All Board policies, including those that delineate institutional standards and professional conduct expectations, are made available to faculty and students via the District website (3.15). Updates or changes to Board policies are made available campus-wide through email notification from the Chancellor’s Office. As part of Cypress College’s extensive offerings or division/flex workshops, there is a consistent emphasis placed on the proper understanding and adherence to the various provisions of the code of conduct (3.91). Students are made aware of the existing Student Conduct Code through its publication in the Cypress College Catalog, Schedules of Classes, and Student Handbook and Academic Procedures Manual. Selective provisions of the Student Conduct Code are incorporated into the faculty course syllabi (3.75, 3.15, 3.9).

3.2

It is the responsibility of the Instructional and Student Services Deans or those from Student Services to provide any student who is alleged to have violated the Student Conduct Code with a copy of the District approved code of conduct. Faculty members are also informed of the College policies and procedures through the above publications, as well as workshops, campus communiqués, regular Academic Senate meetings, and the NOCCCD collective bargaining agreement (3.78).

3.8 Interview with Dennis Davino, Educational Interpreter Training Program Director

Self Evaluation The expectations of adhering to codes of conduct are printed in the various College publications. Cypress College makes every effort to make all aware of the standards of conduct expected of its faculty, staff, and students.

Planning Agenda None. 8. Institutions offering curricula in foreign locations to students other than U.S. nationals operate in conformity with standards and applicable Commission policies. Cypress College does not offer any curriculum in foreign locations to non-U.S. citizens. Reference Documents 3.1 Cypress College website — www.cypresscollege. edu

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Distance Education: — J:\Distance Education\DE

3.3 IRP Research – Counseling 140 — www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/SE/ COUN140.pdf 3.4 Cypress College Mission and Vision Statements www.cypresscollege.edu/about/atAGlance/missionVision.aspx 3.5 IRP Research – Supplemental Instruction — www. cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/SE/ SIperformance_Sp09.pdf 3.6 College Catalog, Special Programs — www. cypresscollege.edu/Media/Website%20Resources/ PDFs/catalog/2010-11_CypressCollege_catalog.pdf 3.7 Distance Education Plan — J:\Distance Education\ DE Plan 2008- 2011

3.9 Cypress College Catalog — www.cypresscollege. edu/academics/CollegeCatalog.aspx 3.10 Schedule of Classes — www.cypresscollege.edu/ academics/ScheduleofClasses.aspx 3.12 Email from Michael Brydges, Learning Community Coordinator 3.13 Email from Nancy Deutsch, Staff Development Coordinator 3.14 Section 55206 of the Guidelines also NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 66700 and 70901, Education Code. Reference: Sections of Distance Education Plan — J:\Distance Education\DE Plan 2008- 2011 3.15 North Orange County Community College Board Policies and Administrative Procedures —www. nocccd.edu/Policies/PoliciesAndProcedures. htm#BoardPolicies 3.16 Email from Curriculum Committee Chair, Cherie Dickey, posted on Blackboard course site 3.17 Distance Education Report approved by the Curriculum Committee Spring 2009 — J:\Curriculum minutes & Other Info and posted on the login page at www.curricunet.com/cypress/?CFID=78439&CFT OKEN=95943849 3.18 Planning and Budget Minutes, March 4, 2010 — J:\ Planning & Budget Committee\PBC Minutes for 2010-11 3.19 Chancellor’s Office California Community Colleges Academic Affairs Division Instructional Programs and Services (2008). Distance Education Guidelines (2008 Omnibus Version). Chancellor’s Office Califor-

131

nia Community Colleges Website

responses to several questions. On Blackboard

3.20 Academic Senate Minutes 2007 — J:\Academic Senate\Senate Minutes 07-08

3.42 Steve Donley, Dean of Career Technical Education, email 12/07/2009

3.21 SLO Committee Minutes — www.cypresscollege. edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/SLO/Instruction/ Course.aspx

3.43 SLOs — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/SLO

3.22 Academic Senate and Curriculum Minutes — J:\Academic Senate Minutes and J:\Curriculum minutes & other info 3.23

TracDat

3.24 CurricUNET website — www.curricunet.com/cypress/ 3.25

Curriculum Committee Handbook

3.26 Student Satisfaction Survey — www.cypresscollege. edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rsurveys.aspx 3.27 Staff Development flyer and email re. Michael Flores’ presentation 3.28 Distance Education Course Quality Rubric — J:\Distance Education\DE Course Quality Rubric

3.44 Program Review Cycle — www.cypresscollege.edu/ IRP/Resources/Research/PROGRAM_REVIEW_ROTATION_SCHEDULE.pdf 3.45 ARCC — www.cccco.edu/ OurAgency/ TechResearchInfo/ResearchandPlanning/ARCC/ tabid/292/Default.aspx 3.46 Stacy Howard, Articulation, ASSIST Status Report — Fall 2009 document on Blackboard site. 3.47 Cypress College End of the Year Report — www. cypresscollege.edu/newsEvents/Publications 3.48 Emails from Division Deans: Dave Wassenaar and Steven Donley 3.49 Opening Day agendas on Blackboard for last several years.

3.29 Valentina Purtell, Director, SCE ESL, email 1/15/10

3.50 GE SLO’s — www.cypresscollege.edu/academics/ CollegeCatalog.aspx

3.30 Instructional Quality Assessment Validation Guidelines — J:\Program Review and Department Planning\Department Planning and Program Review

3.51 Blackboard documents regarding validating cutscores, placement, and enrollment patterns

3.31 Lynn Mitts, M.A., R.T. (R), RDMS, Program Director, Radiology & DMS, email dated 2/24/2010 3.32

Cherie Dickey (Curriculum Chair), Email 1/27/10

3.33

Ben Izadi, SLO Coordinator, Email 11/12/09

3.34

Cherie Dickey, Curriculum Chair, Email 2/18/10

3.35 Institutional Effectiveness Plan — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rreports.aspx 3.36 Institutional Effectiveness Report — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ResearchandEvaluation /rsurveys.aspx 3.37 Alison Robertson, SLO Committee member, email 2/18/2010 3.38 Lynn Mitts, M.A., R.T. (R), RDMS, Program Director, Radiology & DMS, email dated 2/24/2010

3.52

Donna Landis email 10/21/2009

3.53 DSPS website — www.cypresscollege.edu/services/dsps 3.54 CSFI — www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/ Research/SE/CSFIStudentSurveyF08Sp09Findings_Summary.pdf 3.55 Faculty Readiness and Training, Distance Education Plan, page 21 – J:\Distance Education 3.56 BSI Action Plan — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/ InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 3.57 Director of Institutional Research and Planning, Santanu Bandyopadhyay, interviewed on 11/2/2010 3.58 VP, Administrative Services Office, email from Barbara Woolner, 4/26/2010

3.39 Interview with Curriculum Committee Chair, Cherie Dickey

3.59 Three-year Follow-up of Cypress College Students, also known as Student Right to Know (SRTK) — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rreports.aspx

3.40 Cherie Dickey, Curriculum Committee Chair, email 12/09/2009

3.60 Nancy Deutsch, GE SLO Committee member, email 4/16/2010

3.41 Dr. Robert Simpson, Executive Vice-President,

3.61 Elizabeth Pacheco, Dental Assisting Program, email

132

Cypress College

2/25/2010 3.62

Table 2 of this Report

loginf 3.86

Study Abroad literature

3.63 Cypress College Catalog — www.cypresscollege. edu/academics/CollegeCatalog.aspx

3.87 Noel-Levitz Survey — www.cypresscollege.edu/ about/InstitutionalResearch/rsurveys.aspx

3.64

3.88

Interview with Ben Izadi, SLO Coordinator

3.65 Interview with Cherie Dickey, Curriculum Chair 3.66 Syllabus Guidelines and Checklist — J:\Curriculum minutes & Other Info 3.67

Interview with Stacy Howard, Articulation Officer

3.68 Transfer Center — www.cypresscollege.edu/services/transfer

Interview with Ben Izadi, SLO Coordinator

3.89 2010 - 2011 Proposed Budget & Financial Report (p. 11) — www.nocccd.edu/Departments/FandF/ documents/201011ProposedBudget.pdf 3.90 Student Right to Know Data — www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Research/SE/srtk2002cypress.pdf 3.91

MyGateway Staff Development Calendar

3.69 Trip Tic — www.cypresscollege.edu/services/transfer/resources 3.70 @Cypress — www.cypresscollege.edu/newsEvents/ news/atcypress.aspx 3.72 Marc Posner, Public Information Officer, email, 5-710 3.73 Email/Interview Fola Odebunmi, President United Faculty 3.75

Student Handbook

3.76 Program Review — www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/ Resources/Planning/CypressCollegeCycleofQualityReview_revised.pdfc 3.77 Special Programs Review for Service Learning and Study Abroad — J:\Quality Review/Special Programs 3.78

Collective Bargaining Agreement

3.79

California Assembly Bill 1725 (Vasconcellos,1985)

3.80 SLO Workshops Status Worksheets — J:\SLO Team\Workshops\SLO_Workshop_participation_ April22_09 3.81 Research Bulletins — www.cypresscollege.edu/ about/InstitutionalResearch/irbulletins.aspx 3.82 Institutional Planning and Research website — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch 3.83 2008 Annual Performance Report for Title V Grant — J:\Title V Grant 2003-2008 3.84 Educational Master Plan — www.cypresscollege. edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 3.85 myGateway — mygateway.nocccd.edu/cp/home/

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

133

Standard IIB: Student Support Services

Services Division, the College has seen improvements in measures of monitoring, enhancing, and fostering student success.

The institution recruits and admits diverse students who are able to benefit from its programs, consistent with its mission. Student support services address the identified needs of students and enhance a supportive learning environment. The entire student pathway through the institutional experience is characterized by a concern for student access, progress, learning, and success. The institution systematically assesses student support services using student learning outcomes, faculty and staff input, and other appropriate measures in order to improve the effectiveness of these services.

The Fall 2009 Student Services Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) reveals improvements in many areas of student services and the campus environment at Cypress College since the previous self-study was completed (4.1). Since 2006, the College has implemented an aggressive outreach program to K-12 feeder schools and the greater community. Under the direction of the Dean of Student Support Services, a Student Ambassador program was created to utilize Cypress College students in outreach activities. Student Support Services staff conduct trainings with Student Ambassadors and attend outreach events and activities to recruit and assist prospective Cypress College students.

Descriptive Summary The Student Services Division (consisting of Counseling & Student Development and Student Support Services) supports the framework of the College’s Mission and goals by providing support services that maximize the potential of prospective and current students to achieve academic and career success. Since the College’s previous self study, the Division has reported significant achievements in completing student learning outcomes and increasing the availability of services. The College’s online services in Admissions allow students to access their records, search the Schedule of Classes, and register, all without leaving their homes. Facilities have expanded and allowed the Division to more efficiently meet the needs of students. The majority of the Counseling & Student Development Division is now centrally located in the Student Center along with the Assessment Center, Admissions & Records Office, and Bursar’s Office. Student Support Services, including Financial Aid, Extended Opportunity Programs & Services (EOPS), CARE, CalWORKS, and Disabled Students Program & Services (DSPS) are centrally located on the first two floors of the Cypress College Complex building. Evidence detailed below demonstrates the dramatic increases in financial aid awards and services provided to students participating in the Counseling, EOPS, CARE, CalWORKs, and DSPS programs. Through the combined efforts of the programs in the Student 134

The Dean of Student Support Services is responsible for outreach efforts. He works closely with the Dean of Counseling and Student Development to adequately staff college fairs and share campus information with high school personnel, students, and parents. Student Services staff are also responsible for making presentations at high schools to discuss such topics as the admissions application process, programs, and services offered by the College as well as university transfer requirements. Both instructional and student services areas maintain publications and marketing materials that are used for events and activities. Entering freshmen arrive at Cypress College informed about the matriculation process, financial aid programs, EOPS requirements, academic support programs, career services, technology, and counseling courses that promote success. Cypress College’s admissions procedures are open and accessible since the College website was redesigned in 2007. Application functions, as well as other website features, are available 24/7 as a result of myGateway’s online student portal (4.91). Any individual 18 years of age or older or a high school graduate who can benefit from instruction is welcome to attend Cypress College. In accord with the North Orange County Community College District (NOCCCD) Board policy, high school students may also be admitted after meeting specific requirements, which are outlined in the College Catalog, Schedule of Classes, and on the College’s Website (4.2). Open access to higher education is a key component of Cypress College

the mission of California’s community colleges. State law requires that all who can benefit from instruction be admitted to the institution. While maintaining the requirements related to application information, the Admissions & Records Department assists students with first-rate service to ensure an easy transition. The staff are well-trained, speak multiple languages, and are accessible on site or via the telephone and Internet. The Student Satisfaction Inventory conducted by Noel-Levitz in Fall 2009 showed improved ratings for Admissions & Records from the 2007 survey level. The Student Equity Plan was updated in 2009 to ensure equity in access to the College for various ethnic groups and students with disabilities. The Student Equity Committee consists of representatives from faculty, management, classified, and student constituencies. The group has identified many of the factors that might account for the observed achievement gaps among the various ethnic, gender, and disability groups on campus, and has developed action plans to address them (4.3). Student Services staff and instructional faculty encourage students to take advantage of the academic assistance services on campus. In addition to the Learning Resource Center (LRC) and computer labs in specific instructional divisions, the College has a variety of student service components to address students’ learning needs. Below is a brief overview of the services provided by many of the student service and campus support areas: • Admissions & Records, in the College’s Student Center, is the first destination on campus for most students. Staff oversee admissions, registration, records, and online services. • Associated Students of Cypress College dedicate themselves to promoting higher education, representing and supporting the students, and advocating for their needs and concerns with passion, trust, and teamwork. • Athletics provides a range of intercollegiate sports for both men and women that compete in the Orange Empire Conference. Sports instruction and performance courses are taught year round. A workout facility is available for all students to use. • Bursar’s Office provides all students with financial services related to their educational experience and Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

other support services for campus programs and clubs. • CalWORKs assists students to become self sufficient, gain independence from public assistance, obtain a job, and continue life-long learning. • Campus Safety provides and maintains a safe and secure instructional environment while respecting the rights and dignity of individuals utilizing programs and facilities of the College. • CARE assists single parents receiving Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF) to increase their education skills, become more confident and selfsufficient, and move from welfare to independence. • Career Planning Center (CPC) provides resources and support services designed to assist students and the general public in the cultivation and enhancement of aptitudes to explore and research career and major options, define goals and decisions, enhance employability, and prepare for life-long learning. • Counseling Center is committed to promoting student learning and success by providing academic, career, and personal counseling, along with classes and support services to maximize student potential for achieving educational and life success. • Disabled Students Program & Services (DSPS) provides accommodations to students with disabilities that ensure their equal access to College programs and facilities and maximize their potential for success in achieving their individual educational and career goals. • Extended Opportunity Programs & Services (EOPS) assists students with economic, linguistic, and educational challenges to enroll and succeed in higher education and successfully prepare for careers. • Financial Aid strives to maintain a professional, respectful, and peaceful environment and promote accountability of students by providing financial aid services to students who show demonstrated financial need. • Health Center strives to reduce the need for students to seek off-site health services by providing quality health care, education, and information. • International Students Program (ISP) strives to in135

ternationalize the campus and its community by recruiting, integrating, and supporting international students (F-1 visa holders) of diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds. • Library and Learning Resources Center (LLRC) supports the campus and community by encouraging life-long learning, including the abilities to locate, evaluate, and apply information to daily living. • Matriculation works to ensure that all students who are admitted to the College are properly assessed, persist to the next academic term, and achieve their educational objectives. • Student Activities Center creates and provides students with a safe and welcoming environment away from the academic demands that they face on campus, supports all active campus clubs — including the Associated Students Council — and provides a variety of programs and activities that enhance student life. • Transfer Center provides a variety of services to facilitate the preparation and transfer of students, especially those who are historically and currently underrepresented in the transfer process. • TRAC program assists single parents pursuing vocational majors and students pursuing nontraditional trade/career majors in attaining the life skills needed to become economically, psychologically, and socially self sufficient. • Veterans Affairs Office provides information and customer service to veterans on available educational benefits in accordance with federal and state regulations. Under the leadership of the Dean of Student Support Services, student learning outcomes (SLOs) development began in 18 student services areas in November 2006. At the institutional level, the College measures a student’s success by course completion, final grade, program persistence, degrees, and certificates awarded. Student Services areas measure student learning outcomes by a variety of actions as identified in Bloom’s Taxonomy. Student Services are currently in their fourth year of SLO development. All Student Services areas have identified and assessed at least three SLOs. The development began in 2006 with a series of training ef136

forts. On November 16, 2006, the division adopted the Nichols and Nichols model for the development and assessment of SLOs (4.95). Each department has completed at least three full cycles of assessment and most are well on their way through the fourth cycle of assessment (4.4). The division engages in regular dialogue regarding SLOs and is regarded as a model program for the development of SLOs. The CCC System Office provided a commendation in the February 2009 program review, and the Chief Student Services Officers Association highlighted Cypress College Student Services’ efforts in 2009 at a Regional Training as an exemplary program (4.92). In Summer 2009, the campus successfully configured TracDat for the monitoring and reporting of SLOs as well as campus planning documents. The Dean of Student Support Services as well as the Matriculation Manager are members of the College-wide SLO Committee, which provides information, guidance, and support to faculty and staff involved in the development and assessment of SLOs. Student Services SLOs are determined by the members of the department or service unit. Typically, the manager or program coordinator is responsible for reporting SLOs. However, depending on the types of assessment activities and objectives, a wide variety of staff and faculty may participate in the process. Managers, faculty, and classified staff in the Student Services Division participate on shared-governance committees to help shape the dialogue about student access, progress, learning, and student success.

Self Evaluation Student success remains a central topic of discussion and key focus for the College. Campus leadership and shared governance committees address student success through committees and planning teams. Standard IV of this self-study will detail the campus organization and governance; however, the following groups engage in frequent dialogues about student success:

• Instructional divisions

• Individual instructional programs

• Individual instructional departments

• Student Services Council

• President’s Advisory Cabinet Cypress College

• Planning and Budget Committee

• Institutional Effectiveness Taskforce

• Deans and Directors Team

• Leadership Team

• Management Team

• Enrollment Master Planning Group

• District Educational Master Plan Committee

• Banner Steering Team

• College Technology Committee

• Student Learning Outcomes Leadership Group

• Diversity Committee

• Curriculum Committee

• Academic Senate

• Petition Committee

• Associated Students

• Safety Committee

• Staff Development

• LinkME to College Planning Group

• Foundation Board

• Learning Communities

• Opening Day Activities lead by the College President and SLO leaders

• Web Redesign Team (2007-current)

• Basic Skills Initiative Committee

• Curriculum Committee

• Student Equity Committee

In Student Services, the recent Categorical Program Review conducted by the California Community College System Office (CCCSO) helped identify recommendations and commendations for efforts in key Student Services areas (4.5). While Student Services staff members regularly convene monthly Student Services Council meetings and engage in reflective conversations regarding access and success, such topics are also featured throughout the College community (4.6). The best examples are Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

the Deans and Directors Team (DDT) and Planning and Budget groups where student success is a regular agenda item in the planning and implementation of programs and services. For example, on February 23, 2010, the Deans and Directors Team discussed the opportunity to create a Veterans Resource Center. As the number of veterans has increased, appropriate discussions and planning began for the development and execution of a one-stop Veterans Resource Center coordinating support services. Effective Summer 2010, the Veterans Resource Center houses staff and a counselor who spend a portion of their workload dedicated to the success of this special student population. Counseling and Student Development Division meetings along with Student Support Services Division meetings also engage in discussions of student success and have the input of staff, faculty, and students where applicable (4.7). In terms of student access and ability-to-benefit, the College’s admissions criteria can be accessed in numerous ways at a variety of locations to meet the needs of the diverse population the College serves. Print materials are available online via the College website, and primarily in the A&R area. The Dean of Admissions & Records collaborates regularly with the Matriculation Manager and Dean of Counseling and Student Development to ensure that the admission process allows students admitted to the College to matriculate, enroll in classes, and successfully follow “steps to success” as described in orientation activities. The application for admission has been placed online since the last accreditation, and the majority of students apply to the College via the web, as evidenced by the first SLO assessed by the Admissions & Records office (4.4). The online version of the application has been designed to trigger immediate instructive emails informing students of the steps needed in order to become a Cypress College student. The College’s website also provides admissions and financial aid information and showcases all the College’s programs, procedures, and support services (4.28). In 2008, Datatel nominated the Cypress College website for “outstanding and innovative web design for higher education environments.” The website redesign team, led by the Dean of Student Support Services, spent approximately two years revamping and updating the campus website to be more accessible and informative 137

to the campus and its constituents. Recent results of the Student Satisfaction Inventory suggest that campus orientations and “steps to success” are guiding students through the appropriate pathways to accessing educational programs at Cypress (4.1). Orientation data collected as part of the Counseling and Student Development SLOs provide strong evidence and support of student learning in terms of measures for access and educational planning. Instructional SLOs developed by courses, departments, and divisions also suggest learning and success are being achieved and modified where applicable (4.4). Student Services Quality Reviews are a key source of information for individual department success. Student satisfaction is measured on these quality reviews, and departments have tailored specific plans tied to SLOs and department goals and objectives (4.8). All student services are reviewed on a four-year cycle, with one-fourth of the programs coming up for review every fall semester. The review begins with surveying the students. The survey results are discussed internally and compared with previous results. A self analysis for any improvement/deterioration is conducted, achievement of previous goals are summarized, and new goals are established. Finally, the resources required to achieve goals as well as strategies to provide services if all resources are not immediately available are analyzed. The reviews are submitted to the Executive Vice President prior to finalization and archived in the shared drive. The reviews are also reported in the Institutional Effectiveness Report. In summary, the College has upheld its Student Services mission by providing support services that maximize the potential of prospective and current students to achieve academic and career success. More than just a mission, collective efforts are continually evaluated through quality reviews, SLO development, and dialogue with shared-governance committees as well as the general College community. Student Services areas share a collaborative spirit among the managers, staff, faculty, and students.

Planning Agenda None. 1. The institution assures the quality of student support services and demonstrates that 138

these services, regardless of location or means of delivery, support student learning and enhance achievement of the mission of the institution.

Descriptive Summary The Student Services Division’s staff, faculty, and managers engage in ongoing and robust dialog about the quality of services offered. As evidenced by Student Services SLO development since 2006 and the Student Services Quality Review process, regular discussions, program reviews, and related goals and objectives supporting the College strategic plan have been implemented (4.8). All 18 student services areas are currently engaged in their fourth year of SLO development and assessment. In April 2009, Cypress College’s Student Services was the “exemplary program” as selected by the College President to be featured during the District Board of Trustees meeting. On April 14, 2008, The Dean of Student Support Services and Dean of Counseling & Student Development gave a presentation describing the context and methodology of SLO development as well as how this process is integrated with the planning process at Cypress College (4.94). The categorical programs in the division consist of DSPS, EOPS, CARE, CalWORKs, and Matriculation. In 2009, these programs underwent an intensive internal review culminating with a site visit from a California Community College System Office (CCCSO) visitation team. The full internal assessment can be found in the Categorical Programs Self Evaluation for Cypress College (4.5). The Student Services Council meets monthly to review, analyze, collaborate, and implement improved service plans for students. Members maintain regular dialogue about existing enrollment processes and explore ways in which they can be streamlined. When needed, recommendations made from this group are taken forward for discussion and approval, to committees such as the Campus Technology Committee, Planning and Budget, and President’s Advisory Cabinet . The Council was instrumental in helping develop and ultimately approve the first Student Services Master Plan in 2007 (4.9). Methods of serving students and monitoring their sucCypress College

cess are evolving at the College as the College utilizes myGateway and various enhanced technological tools. Plans to place degree audit and educational plans online for students, create a “New Student Welcome Night” college preview activity, and retool Early Alert to decrease the referral time to appropriate support services are underway. The goal is to be proactive and identify challenges to student access and success early. New Student Welcome Night orients students to college life and the College’s programs/services. Early Alert allows counseling to develop interventions for students who are not making satisfactory academic progress. The 2009 Categorical Program Review Committee commended Cypress College for its (1) campus and facilities, (2) campus climate, (3) student services programs and staff, and (4) SLO identification, assessment, evaluation and follow-up. As noted by the review team and evidenced by the College’s internal Student Services Quality Review Process for non-categorical programs, Cypress College Student Services regularly monitors the quality of services provided and aggressively identifies ways to improve student learning (4.4, 4.8).

Self Evaluation This standard is partially met at Cypress College through the submission of Student Services Quality Reviews that are an effective means for monitoring the quality of Student Services programs and for setting new goals to improve services. Each of the programs is committed to student success and regularly looks for ways to improve services and the support of student learning. Faculty/staff in services such as Counseling and Assessment demonstrate through quantitative data the links between their professional functions and student success. Additionally, each department has submitted SLOs that assist the division with routine identification, assessment, and responsiveness of learning needs. The development of SLOs has yielded an effective assessment and measurement tool for Student Services offices. Planning is underway to identify additional SLOs to assist the division with effectively managing student support needs. One of the most important ways in which the College determines the quality of student support services is to ask the recipients of those services. The Fall 2009 Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) yielded several sigInstitutional Self Study — Spring 2011

nificant improvements in student services areas. The methodology of the survey ensures that there is a representative cross section of students responding. The number of respondents was adequate to create statistically significant findings. Categories of questions included demographic data, satisfaction with instruction and services, interest in using services more if hours were extended, reasons for attending the College, barriers to college, and campus life (4.1). For Cypress College, of the 14,701 surveys distributed, 1,847 students completed the surveys for a 13% percent response rate. Specifically, the survey indicates the degree to which students report being satisfied or very satisfied with College services. Overall, respondents indicated satisfaction with College services. The areas with the highest satisfaction ratings were Academic Services, Registration Effectiveness, and Instructional Effectiveness. Areas receiving the lowest satisfaction ratings were Campus Support Services and Admissions and Financial Aid. In each case, however, rankings were above the national average of all two-year institutions surveyed by Noel-Levitz. Further, a comparison of the 2009 and 2007 Noel Levitz survey results demonstrates increased satisfaction in the areas of Academic Advising, Admissions and Financial Aid, and Service (4.1). The College is well aware that continued monitoring of services is required to assure both quality and the appropriateness of services, so the Noel Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) is administered every two years. Prior to administering the survey, various campus groups discuss the questions, style, method, and specific areas of concern. Students’ satisfaction with College services is assessed not only in the student survey discussed above but during department quality reviews as well. Service departments conduct individual surveys to complete their Student Services Quality Reviews (SSQR). Some programs, such as categorical programs, rely upon standardized data elements to measure the effectiveness of services. Qualitative research is completed through advisory committees and informal meetings with students. SSQRs from 2009-2010 indicate an extremely high satisfaction rate for the Transfer Center and Health Center, both of which earned “Good” or “Excellent” student satisfaction ratings from 92 percent or more respondents in every area, with the Health Center earn139

ing 100% “Good/Excellent” ratings in four of the seven areas rated. Likewise, Disabled Students Program and Services earned high marks in every category, with every area but one evaluated as “Excellent” or “Good” by a minimum of 93 percent of students. In addition, Admissions & Records exceeded the College standard for student satisfaction in every area, a significant improvement over 2005 indicators (4.8). Both the internal evaluation documents and the annual survey of students reveal that students are generally satisfied with the services they receive at the College. The students’ perception is backed up by quantitative data collected through the College’s Office of Institutional Research and Planning. Several measures concerning students who participate in the Student Services programs reveal that program participants actually succeed at higher rates than the general student population. In a study conducted by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning on the impact of Supplementary Instruction (SI) and Tutoring services, it was found that those who attend these services improve their GPA compared to their peers, after controlling for the student background and preparation. The study also demonstrated how frequency of attending SI sessions impact GPA. Based on the findings of the pilot study, there is a plan to broadbase the data collection. The campus has collaborated with the Basic Skills Committee and Academic Computing to procure hand-held scanners to collect data that would be analyzed regularly. Plans are also underway to determine the funding levels based on impact of the special programs on student success. Such research is valuable when planning and designing programs.

◊

Educational Mission (4.11).

◊

Course, Program and Degree Offerings (4.11).

◊

Academic Calendar and Program Length (4.12).

◊

Academic Freedom Statement (4.13).

◊

Available Student Financial Aid (4.14).

◊

Available Learning Resources (4.15).

◊

Names and Degrees of Administrators and Faculty (4.16).

◊

Names of Governing Board Members (4.17).

2.b. Requirements

◊

The Cypress College 2009-2010 Catalog provides information regarding admission policies, which include eligibility requirements, procedures for new and returning students, residency requirements, and open enrollment. Prospective students can apply for admission by visiting the College website, www.cypresscollege. edu, and accessing the online application system, CCCApply. Applicants may submit their applications for the Fall and Summer semesters at the beginning of March. For Spring semester, applications are accepted at the start of October. Admission to Cypress College is governed by the laws of the State of California and District policies BP 5010, AP 5010, and AP 5011, which can also be accessed via the North Orange County Community College District website (4.18).

◊

Student fees and other financial obligations are presented under the “Fees” section in the Cypress College 2009-2010 Catalog. This section offers information regarding the Associated Students benefits program, campus identification card, enrollment fees, health fee, nonresident tuition, parking, refunds, refund processing fee, and student representation fee. Fee policies BP 5030 and AP 5030 are also explained in details on the North Orange County Community Col-

Planning Agenda None. 2. The institution provides a catalog for its constituencies with precise, accurate, and current information concerning the following:

Descriptive Summary 2.a. General Information The Cypress College 2009-2010 Catalog addresses the following areas:

140

◊

Official Name, Addresses, Telephone Number, and Website (4.10).

Cypress College

lege District website (4.18).

◊

The “Program of Study” section in the Cypress College 2009-2010 Catalog provides information germane to the three basic program types: associate degrees, certificate programs, and transfer programs. The “Graduation/Educational Options” section provides guidelines for students on earning an associate degree as well as describes the three associate degree options offered at the College, which include the following: Option I— Liberal Arts, Option II—Occupational, and Option III—General Studies. Policies BP 4100 and AP 4100 for Program of Study and Graduation/Educational Options are also explained in detail on the North Orange County Community College District website (4.18).

2.c. Major Policies Affecting Students

◊

The “Academic Policies” section in the Cypress College 2009-2010 Catalog offers information on academic honesty, academic honors, the academic renewal policy, advanced placement credit, attendance, course repetition, auditing, grading, grade change, examinations, petitions and appeals, probation and dismissal policies, transcripts, Title IX and civil rights grievances, and withdrawal. The College’s academic policies are also listed and explained in detail under “Academic Affairs” on the North Orange County Community College District website (4.19). The nondiscrimination statement appears under the section “North Orange County Community College District Non-Discrimination Statement” in the Cypress College 2009-2010 Catalog. The College’s nondiscrimination policies reflect Section 59328 of Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1992. The

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

College’s nondiscrimination statement is also available on the North Orange County Community College District website (4.19).

◊

Information regarding acceptance of transfer credits is provided under the “Programs of Study” section in the Cypress College 2009-2010 Catalog. The Catalog lists the baccalaureate-level classes deemed transferable to any university in the California State University system for credit toward a baccalaureate degree, which include the following: business and computer information systems, counseling and guidance, fine arts, health science, language arts, physical education, science/engineering/mathematics, social science, and vocational technical education (4.20).

◊

The Cypress College 2009-2010 Catalog delineates the guidelines germane to grievance and complaint procedures in the section, “Campus Life.” The guidelines for student grievances include procedures on how to file for petitions and appeals, such as academic appeals and admissions and records appeals (4.21).

◊

The sexual harassment policy is addressed under the section “North Orange County Community District Non-Discrimination Statement” in the Cypress College 2009-2010 Catalog. The District categorizes sexual harassment as unlawful discrimination under policies BP 3430 and AP 3430. The College’s unlawful discrimination policies are also explained in detail on the North Orange County Community College District website (4.18).

◊

The “Fees” section in the Cypress College 2009-2010 Catalog provides information regarding refund of fees. Refund policy AP 5030 is also listed on the North Orange County Community College District website (4.18).

2.d. Locations or Publications Where Other Policies May be Found 141

The Schedule of Classes is available to students in printed format for a nominal fee and in digital format for free (4.22, 4.23). The campus also publishes a Student Handbook, which is available in the Student Activities Center and Counseling Center (4.24). The Schedule of Classes and the Student Handbook are used in conjunction with the College Catalog in Counseling classes offered by the Counseling & Student Development Division (4.25).

Self Evaluation Every other year the Catalog is updated by a committee comprised of the Catalog and Schedule Coordinator, students, faculty, and representatives from the Admissions & Records office. The Catalog is reviewed for continuity in layout, ease of use, inclusiveness and currency of information, standardization of terminology, and accessibility. Additional feedback is garnered from the annual reviews done by the divisions, departments, and programs responsible for the Catalog content. Curriculum representatives, including those from distance education classes, are in regular communication with the Catalog and Schedule Coordinator to upgrade catalog information. Revisions are made as needed. This process ensures that changes in policy, procedures, and curriculum are reflected in the catalog. This revised catalog is then published in print and posted online in July each year (4.25, 4.26). Particularly important sections are also excerpted in the Schedule of Classes, which is updated each semester. Any changes made in policy or procedures are communicated to students via an addendum in the printed Catalog, in the Schedule of Classes, and online. Because it is evaluated and updated on a bi-yearly basis by a diversity of individuals, departments, divisions and programs, the Cypress College Catalog is current, complete, clear, easy to understand, easy to use, and well-structured. Currently the Catalog Committee is discussing the inclusion of a Glossary of Terms in the Catalog to enhance clarity and accessibility. In addition, the committee will review the Districtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s shared drive for any policies, such as college liability policies for field trips, which are not published in the catalog and consequently remain virtually inaccessible to the public (4.27). To address this oversight, the committee is looking into creating links from the campus website to the District 142

website.

Planning Agenda None. 3. The institution researches and identifies the learning support needs of its student population and provides appropriate services and programs to address those needs. Every semester, the Office of Institutional Research and Planning conducts a demographic analysis of incoming students (I://Demographics/Census). Additionally, the assessment test scores of students are analyzed by ethnicity and gender. The research findings indicate a growing number of Hispanic students are enrolling in Cypress College. Existing research indicates that Hispanic students and students from ethnic minorities are academically less prepared and require special services to be successful in college (4.93). Both academic and student services programs are geared to attend to the needs of these students. Programs such as Puente and LinkME help integrate Hispanic students into College; using STEM Grant funds, several initiatives are taken to serve the under-prepared Hispanic students. 3.a. The institution assures equitable access to all of its students by providing appropriate, comprehensive, and reliable services to students regardless of service location or delivery method.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College emphasizes education for the individual student by providing equal access to all student support services. Each student support division serves the educational needs of the entire student population by adhering to the divisional student learning outcomes. Within the Cypress College Student Services Division, co-curricular student learning has been central in the design and implementation of various programming efforts and learning interventions. These along with departmental mission statements and individual unit goals were evaluated and assessed to determine the progress of the stated outcomes. During each of these SLO cycles, individual units developed outcomes, designed activities, completed assessments, and created improvement plans based on independent dialogue Cypress College

and feedback and subsequently developed a framework that would create a collaborative effort between units (4.4). Departments provide access to services by several means of delivery in order to accommodate the needs of their own student population. With the implementation of myGateway/Webstar and CCCapply, Cypress College students have access to online services such as admissions, registration, adding/dropping classes, transcripts, grade retrieval, class schedules, campus catalogs, and new student orientations. These services can also be accessed in person at the appropriate departments on campus for special needs populations. With the voter approval of Measure X, NOCCCD was provided $239 million for facility expansion and improvement at Cypress College, Fullerton College, and the School of Continuing Education. Cypress College’s new Student Center, which opened in Spring 2008, houses the Admissions & Records, Bursars, Assessment, Counseling, Career Planning, Transfer Centers, and Food Services. The Counseling and Student Development Division maintains complete guidance service, including:

◊

Orientation of new students to a successful college experience both in-person and online.

◊

Counseling by telephone, in-person, or online to provide assistance in the selection of courses of study, and individual guidance in matters of aptitude and personal adjustment.

◊

Tracking the number of appointments made, attended, or canceled by students with the College’s SARS Software product.

◊

Retrieving outside academic transcripts online through the Singularity Hershey System.

All of the Student Services areas provide useful online information and resources for students on the College website. For instance, the Transfer Center includes access to ASSIST, an online student-transfer information system showing how credits from one institution apply to another. Also available are Major Preparation Sheets and CSU and IGETC checklists. The Career Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Center offers a wide variety of online programs to assess career interests and strengths, provide information for specific careers, and assist in resume building and interview skill development. The EOPS site houses specific forms, calendars of opportunities, and links to valuable resources. EOPS is a categorical program that provides support services including counseling, book service, and tutoring for students who are traditionally underrepresented and place into remedial math and English courses (4.28).

Self Evaluation Financial aid services have been greatly improved with the availability of online services such as the FAFSA, Fee Waiver, Award Letters, and the ability of students to view their academic status on myGateway. The Financial Aid Office has also purchased the Singularity Hershey System, which provides the ability to scan all documents to create a paperless office. Online services for Admissions & Records were judged to be “Excellent” or “Good” at a level exceeding the College standard of 75 percent. Of students surveyed, 52.9 percent rated their satisfaction with WebStar, the online course registration system, as “Excellent,” and another 37.7 percent rated their satisfaction as “Good,” for a total of 90.6 percent. The “Excellent/ Good” satisfaction level for myGateway was at 88.7 percent. Satisfaction with the National Student Loan Clearinghouse earned a “Good or Excellent” rating from 76.8 percent of students (4.8). With the hiring of the Dean of Student Support Services in Summer 2006, Cypress has improved its in-reach and outreach efforts as well as community presence. Upon his arrival, the Dean created a Student Ambassador Program, which enabled the campus to double its outreach efforts by hiring current students to assist in campus tours, campus events, community fairs, and high school career days. The College also holds two annual events - Senior Day and Parent Night. During these events, local feeder high schools are invited to attend a day of workshops and information sharing. Last year, over 1,700 high school students and parents were in attendance. The College uses these events as tools to attract potential high school seniors by providing information about the campus and services. Before the events, students fill out contact cards, which allows staff to follow up to answer questions about attending 143

the institution as well as to gather information about the areas of service. Student and parent responses were used to gauge how well the events went and what could be improved on. The College also used the contact cards to determine how many students ended up enrolling at Cypress College and to see if the College’s marketing goals were met.

Planning Agenda None. 3.b. The institution provides an environment that encourages personal and civic responsibility, as well as intellectual, aesthetic, and personal development for all of its students.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College is committed to promoting the Core Values of Excellence, Integrity, Collegiality and Inclusiveness, all of which contribute to personal and civic responsibility of its students. The College fosters a climate that emphasizes teamwork, collaboration, communication, and respect both on campus and with the surrounding community. Cypress College embraces diversity, provides an accessible, supportive climate, and emphasizes honesty, fairness, accountability, and trust through its high standards in instruction and student services (4.29). The College helps students to actualize these values by offering a range of activities and opportunities for student involvement outside the classroom and provides a learning environment that promotes these personal attributes. The College makes student rights and responsibilities very clear through several publications and the College website. Policies related to academic standards and student conduct are included in the Catalog, Student Handbook, and Schedule of Classes (4.30). One key to student success is raising students’ awareness of the services and opportunities available to them. New students are encouraged to attend a New Student Orientation that provides important information about getting started at the College as well as highlighting the wealth of opportunities available to connect them with the College. Students are encouraged to join campus clubs and become involved in student government and other extracurricular campus activities (4.31). Student Success Week, which is offered at the start of 144

each semester, offers a variety of informational workshops on financial aid, stress management, undecided majors, and study skills. Students learn about grants, fee waivers, transfer, and the EOPS, CARE and CalWORKs programs. Workshop participants earn a ticket for a drawing and a chance to enter contests and win prizes (4.32). The Associated Students (AS) of Cypress College is an elected and appointed group of students that are given the opportunity to represent the students of the College and advocate for their issues and concerns. AS offers students the opportunity to share in College governance, interact with professionals, and to participate in social and cultural activities. Furthermore, students are encouraged to create and administer their own programs and support systems that reflect diversity and instill self reliance, ethical leadership, and responsible action (4.33). Students are encouraged and given the opportunity to serve on many campus committees to provide their own input to decisions that affect all students. AS students participate in the following campus committees (4.34):

◊

Academic Senate

◊

Campus Technology Committee (CTC)

◊

Chancellor’s Cabinet/District Planning Council (DPC)

◊

Curriculum Committee

◊

Campus Diversity Committee

◊

Graduation

◊

KinderCaminata

◊

Matriculation Advisory Committee

◊

President’s Advisory Cabinet (PAC)

◊

Petitions

◊

Planning and Budget Committee (PBC)

◊

Senior Day

◊

Staff Development Committee

◊

Student Equity Committee

◊

Safety

◊

Accreditation

◊

Strategic Plan Cypress College

◊

Student Learning Outcomes (SLO)

◊

Distance Education

◊

Catalog, Scheduling, Registration

◊

District Employee Equal Opportunity Advisory Committee

◊

District Technology Advisory Committee

◊

Title V Grant Steering Committee

◊

Various hiring committees

Student life on campus is a reflection of student interests and talents. Cypress is home to over 25 different clubs with a wide variety of purposes. Groups are focused on public service, ethnic and religious identification, sexual orientation, purely social pursuits, and campus involvement, to name a few. Student groups are involved with Club Rush, Blood Drives, Thanksgiving Food Drive, and World Fest. New clubs form to meet the changing needs of the student body. Membership in a club is a great way for students to become connected to the campus and to enjoy the benefits that the College has to offer. A portion of the proceeds from the purchase of the Associated Student Benefits Card enriches the College’s academic, athletic, and artistic community by helping to fund extracurricular programs and events (4.35). Students are exposed to life skills and social responsibility through events such as Financial Aid workshops on credit card and money management. Extended Opportunity Programs and Services (EOPS) offers workshops on self esteem, parenting, study skills, and time management. The Transfer Center provides the opportunity to meet with representatives from 4-year colleges and universities and participate in university tours, workshops, and transfer fairs. The STEM Science Lecture Series offers presentation and Q & A sessions on current topics in the world of science, which are open to all students. One recent topic focused on stabilizing the greenhouse problem (4.36). The Career Planning Center regularly presents both employability enhancement and student success workshops on topics such as job search strategies, resume writing, interview skills, problem solving/critical thinking, goal setting/decision making, concentration/ memory techniques, and procrastination. These “soft skills” not only help students achieve academic success Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

but also meet career and life success needs. Comprehensive handouts are available at the Career Center for those who are unable to attend the workshops (4.37). Intellectual, aesthetic, and personal development opportunities are easily found at the College. The Cypress College Art Gallery makes annual presentations of student work created during the school year. The works are juried, and awards are presented. The Photography Department offers regular exhibitions presented in the Eduard de Merlier Photography Gallery with a focus on outstanding contemporary photography. Students and faculty in the Journalism Department are currently working in partnership with Lutsk Liberal Arts University, Ukraine, and with the University of Warsaw. The Study Abroad Program allows students the opportunity to gain a global perspective for effective living and working in an international environment, providing an opportunity to develop a broader perspective on life and personal values and goals. Employers recognize that applicants who have an international experience can bring knowledge, skills, and cultural awareness that are tremendous workplace assets (4.38). The International Students Program (ISP) strives to internationalize the campus by recruiting, integrating, and supporting international students of diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds. Students participate in various clubs and work as tutors and student workers on campus. The presence of these international students contributes to not only making the College more ethnically and culturally diverse, but also to promoting personal growth and development of all of its students both in and outside the classroom. Many personal, intellectual, and cultural interactions and exchanges take place between American and international students. The ISP offers a number of events and activities for its students such as potluck dinners, holiday luncheons, and end-of-year recognition and graduation receptions (4.39). Many campus Learning Communities — including Puente, Legacy, Honors and UTAP — provide the opportunity for students to attend lectures given by guest speakers, cultural events, conferences and field trips to theaters, museums and universities which enhance the learning experience. UTAP students attend extracurricular activities, typically instruction-related, including a Bolsa Chica bonfire, a stage play, a university tour, Monologue Night, Senior Day, KinderCaminata, 145

and the L.A. Festival of Books (4.40). The Disabled Students Program and Services (DSPS) celebrates Disabilities Awareness Month in October. For Fall 2009, DSPS created a display in the Library and emailed FAQâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s about disability topics to the faculty and staff to share with students (4.41). Many of the Collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s programs offer opportunities for student leadership, mentorship, and community involvement, which are critical components to student success. Puente and UTAP students become mentors for succeeding generations. Puente, Legacy, and UTAP students have all created clubs to support their programs and reach out to other students on campus. The Educational Ambassadors Program is called upon to assist in Teacher Preparation Program (TPP) events at local schools and participate in KinderCaminata as both readers and tour guides. Additionally, the TPP students work with Book Buddies and First Book to acquire donations of new reading books that are then distributed to local schools during events with Educational Ambassadors.

Self Evaluation Cypress College provides a variety of academic and non-academic activities, events, programs, workshops, and services that support an environment where students can exercise civic and social responsibility as well as develop intellectually, aesthetically, and personally. The wide array of activities exposes students to and provides perspectives on issues presented in academic and non-academic settings. These events and opportunities enhance their total educational experiences and personal growth. The College has many avenues for evaluating its efforts in this area including Student Services Master Plan (SSMP), Student Services Quality Reviews (SSQR), Student Learning Outcomes (SLO), the Campus and District Strategic Plans, Institutional Effectiveness, Education Master Plan (EMP), Student Equity Plan (SEP), Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI), and Program Reviews (4.42).

Planning Agenda None. 3.c. The institution designs, maintains and evaluates counseling and/or academic advis146

ing programs to support student development and success and prepares faculty and other personnel responsible for the advising function.

Descriptive Summary The mission of the Counseling Department is to promote student learning and success by providing academic, career, and personal counseling, and classes and support services to maximize student potential for achieving educational and life success. The department is unique in that it is engaged in both instruction and support services. All members of the Counseling faculty teach student development courses that are designed to promote academic and life success and include academic and transfer planning, career development, and personal/life management. Counselors also meet with students individually and in groups to assist them in reaching their short- and long-term goals (4.43, 4.44, 4.45). Counselors are located in several academic buildings/ divisions and are specialists in working with specific majors. They are assigned to the following divisions: Business & CIS, Career/Technical Education, Fine Arts, Health Sciences, Language Arts, Physical Education/Athletics, Science, Engineering & Math, Social Sciences, and Student Support Services. Close proximity to the academic divisions facilitates the working relationship between counselors and teaching faculty for the benefit of students. In addition, counseling services are provided by the following departments on campus: California Work Opportunity Responsibility for Kids (CalWORKs), Career Planning Center (CPC), Cooperative Agencies Resources for Education (CARE), Disabled Students Program and Services (DSPS), Extended Opportunity Programs and Services (EOPS), International Students Program (ISP), Transfer Center, and Veterans Affairs. Counseling services are also provided by various special programs/projects such as University Transfer Achievement Program (UTAP), Puente, Legacy (formerly Black Studies), and Teacher Preparation. Finally, counseling services are provided by grant funded initiatives such as Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM), Perkins, and Basic Skills (BSI). These counseling units offer services to assist students in making effective academic, personal, and career decisions. Cypress College

A variety of counseling options are offered to students: appointment, walk-in, telephone, and web-based email communication via onlinecounselor@cypresscollege. edu (4.46). The Counseling Center provides services to all students in a centralized location on the second floor of the Student Center. It is open twelve months of the year, and its operational hours are M-TH 8:00 am - 6:00 pm; F 8:00 am - 12:00 pm. It is the initial point of counseling contact for new students on campus and allows other departments to direct students to a central location. Its primary function is to answer quick questions for students related to courses, degree requirements, and general college information. All counseling services in the Center are provided on a walk-in basis while limited appointments are available M-TH 3:00 pm - 6:00 pm. Counselors address the immediate concern of the student and then make referrals to meet with other counselors by major as appropriate. Because of the walk-in nature of the Center, some counseling services are better provided in a half-hour appointment; all appointments are made through the support staff in the Center. The Counseling & Student Development Division staff includes a Dean of Counseling/Student Development, one Counseling Department Coordinator with 20% reassigned time, 18 full-time counselors and four full-time classified. The counseling staff in the Student Support Services Division includes one full-time EOPS counselor, two adjunct EOPS counselors, and one CalWORKs counselor (4.47). Additional adjunct faculty, part-time classified staff, and work-study students are hired throughout both divisions as needed and as funds permit. Counselors conduct outreach to feeder high schools and the local community by participating in college nights and various outreach events. Each counselor is assigned at least one local feeder high school from the College’s service area to maintain constant communication, provide College workshops, and attend college nights/fairs hosted by the high schools (4.48). Counselors are required to contact their high school counterparts via email, phone call, or visits at their assigned high school at least once every two months. The Counseling & Student Development Division also hosts an annual High School Counselors Breakfast to increase communication and continue to strengthen Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

partnerships with local feeder high schools. Counselors are involved in the planning and coordination of the College’s annual Senior Day, Parent Night, Kindercaminata activities, and a new pilot program called, “LinkME to College,” which was created in response to the Strategic Plan Action item of developing and implementing a summer readiness program (4.49). Due to the state budget crisis, procedures to provide better service to students were implemented by the Dean of Counseling & Student Development based on recommendations from faculty and staff during division meetings (4.50) and from members of the Deans Advisory Council (DAC), which is a taskforce of three full-time counselors who provide input with respect to the operations of the Counseling & Student Development Department (4.51). An increasing number of students were seeking counseling services approximately six weeks before the fall term. Previous deans of counseling used counselors not currently on contract work during the summer and paid them overload (4.52), resulting in a significant deficit in the Counseling budget. Through the work of the DAC, the Dean of Counseling & Student Development was able to move some of the counselors’ part-of-load hours during non-peak periods to peak periods and thus not impact the Counseling budget by paying excessive overload costs. In addition, managers offered to assist with presenting the 90-minute overview during the three-hour new student orientations while the counselor stayed in the Counseling Center to assist students. The counselor then proceeds to advise and counsel students immediately following the manager’s overview of general college information (4.53). Along with their work to provide services to students, the counselors represent the division on many campus committees. Specifically, they serve on the Curriculum Committee, Academic Senate, Basic Skills, Student Learning Outcomes, General Education Student Learning Outcomes, Student Services Council, Extended Opportunity Programs and Services, and Disabled Students Program and Services Advisory Committees, Diversity, Online Student Educational Plan Software Taskforce, and Pass Along Appeals Committee. Counselors are trained through a variety of methods. A new counselor shadows the Counseling Department Coordinator. Counseling related paperwork and stu147

dent information systems in SCT Banner are covered as part of training and can be found in the Counselors Handbook (4.59).Other methods include regional or Systems Office training, conferences and workshops such as Ensuring Transfer Success, UC and CSU conferences, private university conferences, Learning Disabilities Eligibility Training, Coordinators training for new Matriculation, EOPS/CARE, DSPS, and Transfer Directors monthly counseling in-service meetings chaired by the Counseling Department Coordinator, District-wide Banner/Argos/Groupwise training, nonviolent crisis intervention training, SARS training, and new faculty orientation conducted by the Staff Development Office, Dean of Counseling & Student Development, and Dean of Student Support Services (4.54).

Self Evaluation Counselors are evaluated according to the evaluation guidelines, which are defined in the Collective Bargaining Agreement with the United Faculty (4.55). The intent of faculty evaluations is to concentrate on improved performance and to acknowledge effective counseling service. The North Orange County Community College District (NOCCCD) uses a variety of methods to evaluate counseling. For temporary parttime counselors, the immediate supervisor performs an evaluation with consultation from the Counseling Department Coordinator (4.56), while tenure track counselors are evaluated by a review committee consisting of faculty peers and administrators, and tenured faculty are evaluated by the Counseling administrator with the Counseling faculty given the option for a peer to participate in the evaluation process as well. Counselors have an opportunity to address and make necessary adjustments based on the recommendations as detailed in their evaluations prior to the next evaluation period. Counseling services are evaluated by the following:

◊

Program Review/Student Services Quality Review (4.5, 4.8)

◊

Student Satisfaction Inventory by Noel Levitz (4.1)

◊

Categorical Programs Site Visit (4.4)

◊

Student Services Master Plan (4.9)

◊

Student Learning Outcomes (4.4)

The results from the Student Satisfaction Inventory 148

(SSI) indicated that students wanted a more focused counseling service to help them succeed. The Dean of Counseling & Student Development met with Institutional Research and Planning to develop an appropriate intervention to help improve services to students. Counseling services are offered at a centralized location as well as in respective departments. In order to identify where the students are expecting improved services, a survey has been designed and will be forwarded to all students after they see a counselor. This process will begin in Fall 2010. Based on the findings, further action plans will be formulated. Staffing adequacy within the Counseling Department and other support services providing counseling services are regularly evaluated by the Dean of Counseling & Student Development and Dean of Student Support Services. If the need is deemed critical to replace full-time counseling positions as a result of retirements, then faculty replacement requests are submitted during the normal faculty prioritization request cycle.

Planning Agenda None. 3.d. The institution designs and maintains appropriate programs, practices, and services that support and enhance student understanding and appreciation of diversity.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College has a strong commitment to diversity as evidenced by curriculum, campus events, outreach efforts, programs, and services. The College has a diversity course requirement that must be met in order to obtain an Associate Degree. A variety of courses that reflect many levels of diversity are available throughout the curriculum to enable students to meet this requirement (4.57). The College also supports learning communities whose objectives are to serve under-represented minority populations. The Legacy Program (4.58), which is comprised mainly of African-American students, and the Puente Program (4.59), which serves mostly Hispanic students, both promote an understanding and appreciation of diversity through course work and extracurricular activities. Student services further enhance an understanding Cypress College

of diversity. Programs such as DSPS, EOPS, and the International Students Program serve students from a variety of backgrounds. Many of the staff members in these programs also have diverse backgrounds. Their efforts further enhance an understanding of diversity and enrich the college experience for all students. The Student Equity Plan (SEP) serves as a tool to help the College gauge its progress in improving access and success rates for all students and in particular underrepresented groups. Updated in Fall 2009, the SEP outlines activities that the College will engage in to improve rates of course completion, degree and certificate completion, and transfer among its diverse student population (4.42). The College’s Diversity Committee plays a major role in promoting diversity. As a shared-governance committee, it meets monthly to discuss issues related to diversity. The committee sets aside funding to support diversity events on campus such as speakers, films, and performances, as well as to purchase diversity-themed DVD’s for the Library (4.60). The Diversity Committee also maintains a monthly multicultural calendar of campus events and activities (4.61). Among the events that have been held over the past five years are:

◊

Disabilities Awareness Month – Library Display, Disability Jeopardy

◊

Kwanzaa celebration with Speaker Dr. Amen Rahh

◊

Black Colleges Fair - Speaker Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

◊

Author James D. Houston on California’s Crossroads Culture

◊

Speaker Marco Firebaugh – Hispanic Heritage Celebration

◊

Performance of Taiko Drum Duo

◊

Black History Month – Speakers Jihad Saafir and May May Ali; Gospel Concert

◊

World Fest

◊

Speaker James Sakatani on WWII Japanese Internment Camp

◊

The Gay Marriage Debate: Legal and

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Religious Issues

◊

Speaker Dr. Terrance Roberts – Celebrating Diversity Forum

◊

Women’s Day of Expression

In addition to these activities, students have the opportunity to develop an understanding of diversity through participation in campus clubs. Of the 27 active clubs on campus in 2009-2010, eleven clubs have a diversity-related focus. Among them are the Japanese Club, the Muslim Students Association, the Puente Club, the Black Student Union, and GALA (Gay and Lesbian Acceptance) (4.62).

Self Evaluation The Office of Institutional Research and Planning conducts the Campus Climate Survey every two years to measure employee satisfaction in a number of areas. Included are questions related to diversity. The NoelLevitz Survey, which also measures satisfaction in a number of areas including diversity, is administered to students on a biannual basis as well. Both surveys have shown increased satisfaction in the area of diversity over the past four years (4.63, 4.1). The Climate Survey conducted in Fall 2009 indicates that the employee ratings regarding the general College atmosphere has improved since the last survey conducted in Spring 2008. Compared to the 2008 study, more employees felt that the College has a strong commitment to supporting diversity activities that address issues relevant to gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgender employees and students. A substantial portion of the survey focused on employees’ perceptions of how re-

Figure 1

149

sponsive the College is to its diverse students and staff. Figure 1 shows the ratings given by the respondents in relation to questions on diversity.

counseling/ orientations), and how to register (4.65). Definitions are provided for what constitutes a continuing, new, or returning student.

Overall, the campus atmosphere related to diversity has improved since the last survey. Although agreement levels vary among different groups several times, the gap is not much. Also, none of the areas were perceived overwhelmingly negatively (below 60% score on Agree/Strongly Agree) by any of the groups. While the campus has improved the perception towards diversity, the good work needs to continue to strengthen the position.

The Admissions & Records Office provides students with current information about registering for classes. The “Six Steps to Registration” handout is available at the Admissions & Records Office, in the Schedule of Classes, and on the College website (4.66). This summary also provides contact information for Admissions & Records, Assessment, and Counseling Centers as well as information regarding applying for admissions, taking assessments, attending an orientation, meeting with a counselor, applying for financial aid, and registering for classes.

In summary, the efforts of the College to support diversity have been varied and extensive. The work of the Student Equity Plan Committee and the Diversity Committee has demonstrated the College’s commitment to a diverse campus community. Finally, the infusion of diversity issues into the curriculum, campus events, and support services has contributed to an enhanced understanding and appreciation of diversity among students and staff.

Planning Agenda None. 3.e. The institution regularly evaluates admissions and placement instruments and practices to validate their effectiveness while minimizing biases.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College maintains an open enrollment policy, following the eligibility requirements outlined in the College Catalog and California Education Code (4.64) and the North Orange County Community College District Board Policy, Chapter 5 BP 5055 referenced from Title V, Sections 51006, 58106, 58108 (4.18). Open enrollment is guided by the North Orange County Community College District Board Policy regarding Enrollment Priorities, Chapter 5 AP 5055 referenced from Title V, Section 58106, which outlines the terms under which enrollment may be limited (4.18). The College Catalog and online website provide admissions information regarding who is eligible to enroll at Cypress College, what the process and deadlines are for applications, what determines residency, what the procedures are for admissions (including assessment and 150

Another document, “Registration Q & A,” provides answers for commonly asked questions and directs students to additional online resources (4.67). The Admissions & Records Office has representatives who speak Spanish, Chinese, and Vietnamese to assist students who may encounter language barriers. Students enrolled in DSPS and EOPS as well as eligible veterans are given early registration dates (4.68). Other students are assigned registration dates based on the number of units completed. The College provides both online and paper applications; CCC Apply applications online are available in both English and Spanish (4.69). Since data is submitted directly by applicants, the information is protected from tampering. This data is stored for purposes of federal and state mandated MIS tracking. Matriculation utilizes Mathematics Diagnostic Testing Project (MDTP) (4.70), Combined English Language Skills Assessment (CELSA) (4.71), and College Tests for English Placement (CTEP) (4.72) assessment tests to place students in appropriate math, ESL, and English classes. These placement tests are on the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office list of approved assessment tools. Additionally, faculty evaluations of student performance and counselor evaluations of academic transcripts can be used to validate the assessment test placements. Students with disabilities go through the Disabled Students Program and Services office, where they are administered the same tests but allowed to use adaptive tools and other appropriate accommodations to complete these tests.

Cypress College

Self Evaluation Cypress College Admissions & Records Office works in conjunction with the Banner Steering Committee, the Banner Student Team, and Fullerton College Admissions & Records Office to test systems and run pilot programs. This continued assessment, experimentation, and evaluation has lead to improvements in the ease of use in the registration process. In the survey administered for the last Program Review for Admissions & Records, the registration process was given a 90% satisfaction rate by students (4.73). Currently, 99% of students use the online application. Use of this application is part of the student learning outcome assessment for Admissions & Records. Each year the Cypress College Admissions & Records administrators collaborate with Fullerton College and School of Continuing Education administrators to maintain the integrity of the College application. In addition, assessment vendors have conducted their own validation studies for cultural and linguistic biases. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning follows a Matriculation Research Calendar of their own creation, which outlines when local validation efforts are conducted (4.74). The campus has spent the past year and a half extensively analyzing MDTP for mathematics course placements. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning meets quarterly with appropriate deans, department chairs, and the Matriculation Advisory Committee to review research studies prior to publishing these studies on the campus J: drive. The College has maintained compliance with the state mandate to conduct validation studies every six years. However, due to statewide Matriculation budget cuts, the campus is waiting to hear from each vendor for research updates. The Admissions & Records Office also works in conjunction with the Student Grievance Campus Petitions Committee to assist students who wish to file a grievance (4.75). Student petitioners are referred to the Student Grievance Campus Petitions Committee Chair who provides petitioners with an overview of the grievance process as well as an understanding of their rights. The chair makes sure that the student has followed the grievance protocol in seeking resolution to this problem. Petitioners who wish to proceed with their grievance are given the Campus Petitions Committee Form and assisted in any way necessary to complete this form (4.76). After the Campus Petitions Committee Form Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

has been completed and submitted, a nine-member Campus Petitions Committee compromised of an administrator, faculty, and student representatives meet to review the evidence provided. A recommendation is then made. If the faculty member agrees with the grade change recommendation, then the Admissions & Records Office would become involved to facilitate the grade change.

Planning Agenda None. 3.f. The institution maintains student records permanently, securely, and confidentially, with provision for secure backup of all files, regardless of the form in which those files are maintained. The institution publishes and follows established policies for release of student records.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College maintains student records permanently, securely, and confidentially. BANNER, implemented in Fall 2001, is a secure data base system requiring a validated username and password to log in to the system and access confidential records (4.77). Students can obtain unofficial transcripts, individual class schedules, and add or drop a class through myGateway, a portal system to obtain real-time data from BANNER. A confidentiality statement appears prior to logging in to BANNER (4.78), which is in accordance with Administrative Procedure, AP 3720 (4.79) and with local, state, and federal laws, as well as the procedures of the North Orange County Community College District. Secure access to student records is in accordance with North Orange County Community College Districtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Administrative and Board Policies (4.80, 4.81), State Law (4.82, p. 20), and Federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (4.83, p. 20, 45). Students have access to records through myGateway or in person at the Admissions & Records Office by presenting a photo form of identification upon request of any documents (4.84, p. 45). Students can request transcripts, duplicate diplomas, and/or certificates in person at the Admissions & Records Office (4.85, p. 45). The Admissions & Records Office at Cypress College houses all student records mostly as Banner electronic files as well as some paper documents in the form 151

of old hard copy transcripts, instructor grade rosters, completed student Petitions for Exceptions, instructor grade changes, Academic Renewals, residency documentation, subpoenas, graduation certificate program information, transcript requests, and verification requests (4.86). All Cypress College transcripts can now be retrieved electronically through either the Singularity Imaging System or BANNER. The transcript storage system is much more efficient for processing and retrieval as well as safety from damage or loss. All electronic transcripts are backed up off site for security purposes. Individual categorical programs maintain their own records, and access to these student records is through BANNER and is the same as through the Admissions & Records Office. Some paper records and forms are still maintained. Board and Administrative Policies of Cypress College and the North Orange County Community College District assure the governance of the maintenance and release of student records under BP 5040 and AP 5040 (4.18). The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act also ensure student records are secure as stated in the Cypress College Catalog 2009-2010 (4.87, p. 20 & p. 45). Cypress College utilizes an electronic record security-software system in which access to student records is password protected. Each student and employee has an individual security protected password, and security is granted according to the level of work expertise. The BANNER log-in process allows security down to the screen and individual user level (4.88). Cypress College provides provisions for securely backing up all student records (4.89). The District backs up all student records on a daily basis through BANNER, where these records are kept indefinitely. Student records are never altered or deleted during the back-up process. In addition to the daily back-up process on BANNER, the District stores back-up tapes offsite for approximately 30 calendar days in case there is a problem with the BANNER daily back-up process.

Self Evaluation Cypress College has provisions for securely backing up all student records, regardless of the form in which those files are maintained. Since 2001, the College has utilized the BANNER database system, which backs up all electronic file entries nightly. As a second means of reliance, tapes of student records are kept at an off-site 152

location for approximately 30 days in the event there is a loss of information with the BANNER system. Paper format documents are securely kept in the Admissions & Records Office. Student demographic information is collected electronically through the online application process, CCC Apply. Prior to 2001, these records were collected through paper application forms and kept by the Cypress College Research Department and kept securely by the Cypress College Researcher. Course grades have been recorded and kept on BANNER since 2001. Archived state-reported records for active students, the MIS Report (Management Information Systems-enrollment census) and the 320 Report (enrolled for quarterly positive attendance and funding) is currently being electronically sent to the State. Cypress College recently developed a Records Retention/Destruction Schedule, which was submitted to the Executive Vice President of Cypress College for review.

Planning Agenda None. 4. The institution evaluates student support services to assure their adequacy in meeting identified student needs. Evaluation of these services provides evidence that they contribute to the achievement of student learning outcomes. The institution uses the results of these evaluations as the basis for improvement.

Descriptive Summary Student Services Quality Review is the primary process used for the examination and evaluation of Student Services programs on a regular and ongoing basis. All support services within the Student Services Division go through quality review in accord with the schedule issued by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning (4.90). However, to keep the evaluation of services current, all support services have completed three full cycles of SLO development. Aspects of every Student Services Program Review and SLO development include:

◊

Each department’s Mission and Vision Statement

◊

Executive Summary of report

◊

Program Description Cypress College

◊

Program Data Collected

◊

Instructional Component (if available)

◊

Program Evaluation Component

◊

Analysis

◊

Goals and Objectives

◊

Signatures and individual comment

◊

Appendices, Instruments, or Action Plans

Aspects of every Student Services Quality Review Report include:

◊

A progress report on the status of current goals and a statement of new goals for the upcoming year.

◊

A plan for achieving the new goals.

◊

A review of the Mission and Vision statements for the department.

◊

Results of the satisfaction surveys administered by the department for Program Review (if available). Those groups who are surveyed include students who use the service.

◊

An analysis of staffing for the department.

◊

An analysis of student usage trends/access to programs and services.

◊

An Action Plan identifying departmental needs (what the department needs to be able to do, but cannot for whatever reason) and the creation of a strategy to deal with that need.

◊

A departmental budget and explanation of need, which itemizes budgetary needs for additional staff, technology, supplies, and other resources that are not included in the department’s current annual budget. These would typically be those items that have been identified as needs from the Program Goals and Action Plan.

Findings associated with the Quality Review are used to measure progress toward the achievement of established departmental goals, identify student needs, establish solutions to challenges, redefine the departInstitutional Self Study — Spring 2011

ment’s mission or vision, if needed, and set new departmental goals. The College uses SLO’s for program improvement. As student learning outcomes are defined institutionally, Student Services will create and expand SLOs to maximize student learning. On November 16, 2006, the Student Services Council adopted the Nichols and Nichols Model for the development of their Student Services Student Learning Outcomes over a five year period (4.95). Using this model, known on campus as the Five Column Model, each office has specified: 1) its mission and goals, 2) intended outcomes, 3) means of assessment, 4) data summary, and 5) how results will be used in the future. Entering 2010-2011, Student Services will develop their fifth cycle of SLOs and assessment and revisit this model in November 2011 to determine if the approach will be modified. When services are evaluated, program strengths and weaknesses are clarified and student needs are identified. Each Student Services program strives to utilize the findings of Quality Review to improve the services it provides for students by including the improvements in its program goals and annual manager goals and objectives.

Self Evaluation The Quality Review format used for all Student Services Division departments is thorough and effective. The division has seen numerous improvements throughout its programs in the last two years, and more goals for improvement have been set. The program review process was customized by Student Services managers and Student Services Council and will be improved upon as necessary. The Quality Review and SLO development model for the Student Services Division has evolved to best accommodate the needs and functions of the division. Cypress College has a commitment to student learning outcomes in Instruction and Student Services. Due to various conferences and training opportunities, student support services personnel are aware of student learning outcomes and are ready to integrate them into the Quality Review and SLO development process. The College’s divisions will need to cooperate/collaborate with each other in order to support students in their achievement of learning outcomes.

153

Planning Agenda

College 2009-2010 Catalog

None.

4.21 “Campus Life” section in the Cypress College 20092010 Catalog

Reference Documents

4.22

4.1

4.23 Schedule of Classes online — www.cypresscollege. edu/academics/ScheduleofClasses.aspx

Noel Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory 2009

4.2 Board Policy on Admissions — www.nocccd.edu/ Policies/PoliciesAndProcedures.htm#TheDistrict 4.3 Student Equity Plan — www.cypresscollege.edu/ about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 4.4 Student Services SLO documents 4.5 Categorical Program Review — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ProgramReview 4.6

Student Services Council Meeting Minutes

4.7

Counseling Division Meeting Minutes

4.8 Student Services Quality Review Reports — J:\ Quality Review\Student Support Services Quality Review 4.9 Student Services Master Plan — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments. aspx 4.10 College Catalog, Official Name, Addresses, Telephone, Number, and Website of the Institution 4.11 College Catalog, Educational Mission. Course, Program, and Degree Offerings 4.12 College Catalog, Academic Calendar and Program Length 4.13 College Catalog, Academic Freedom Statement 4.14

College Catalog, Available Student Financial Aid

4.15

College Catalog, Available Learning Resources

4.16 College Catalog, Names and Degrees of Administrators and Faculty 4.17 College Catalog, Names of Governing Board Members 4.18 North Orange County Community College District Board Policies and Procedures — www. nocccd.edu/Policies/PoliciesAndProcedures. htm#TheDistrict 4.19 North Orange County Community College website – www.nocccd.edu 4.20 “Programs of Study” can be found in the Cypress-

154

Schedule of Classes

4.24

Student Handbook

4.25

College Catalog

4.26 College Catalog online – www.cypresscollege.edu/ academics/CollegeCatalog.aspx 4.27

Campus J:drive

4.28 Cypress College website — www.cypresscollege. edu/services 4.29 Core Values — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/ atAGlance/coreValues.aspx

Cypress College Catalog 2009-10, pg. 4

Cypress College 2009-10 Student Handbook, pg. 3 4.30 Policies related to Student Rights, Responsibilities, Academic Standards and Student Conduct: Cypress College Catalog 2009-10, pgs. 8-9, 12-14, 37-46, Cypress College Spring 2010 Class Scheule, . pgs. 131-133 Cypress College 2009-10 Student Handbook, pgs. . 56-66 4.31 New Student Orientation — www.cypresscollege. edu/admissions/gettingStarted/orientation

Cypress College Spring 2010 Class Schedule, pg. 1

4.32

Spring 2010 Student Success Week flyer

4.33 Associated Students — www.cypresscollege.edu/ studentLife/assiciatedStudents 4.34

Campus committees with AS participation

A. Cypress College Shared Governance Process Committees and Task Forces, 02/01/07

B. Academic Senate Approved Minutes, 02/11/10

C. Campus Technology Committee (CTC) Guidelines

D. District Planning Council (DPC) Purpose and Operational Guidelines

E. Campus Curriculum Committee Composition, 2007-08

Cypress College

F. Campus Diversity Committee Guidelines

• Financial Aid – 11/14/2008

G. Matriculation Advisory Committee Guidelines

H. President’s Advisory Cabinet (PAC) Description, Purpose & Guidelines

C. Annual Report Update on Student Learning Outcomes 2007-2008

D. 2008-2011 Cypress College Strategic Plan

I. Planning and Budget Committee Guidelines

J. Staff Development Committee Guidelines

E. North Orange County Community College District Strategic Plant Framework

K. Student Equity Committee Membership

F. Institutional Effectiveness: How well is Cypress College doing? 3/25/09

4.35 Campus Life, Cypress College Catalog 2009-10, pgs. 35-37

G. Educational Master Plan 2006-2010, pgs. 145154

4.36

Workshops:

H. Student Equity Plan 2004

A. Financial Aid Office Assistance Request Form

B. EOPS Newsletter, March/April 2010

I. Fall 2009 Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory

C. Transfer Center flyers — www.cypressvollege. edu/services/transfer/calendar.aspx

J. New Program Review Proposed for Special Programs.

D. STEM Science Lecture Series email

4.37 Career Planning Center Workshop Series Flyers, Sp 2010 and Sp 2009 4.38 Concrete Walls Project at Cypress College, Oct 14 – Nov 12, 2009 4.39 International Students Program (ISP) 2008-09 International Focus Brochure, ISP calendar, and flyers 4.40

Learning Community Activities:

A. UTAP Fall 2009 and Spring 2010 Calendar

B. Honors Program Requirements – www.cypresscollege.edu/academics/specialPrograms/ Honors

C. Legacy Program/Black Studies Learning Community flyer

D. Fall 2009 Puente Program Report

4.41 Disabled Students Program & Services Disabilities Awareness Month emails 4.42

Evaluating our efforts

A. Student Services Master Plan 2007-2014 Key Findings, pgs. 78-79

B. Student Services Quality Review Report Template.

Examples: • Counseling – 11/17/2008

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Examples: • Special Programs Quality Review Report Service Learning – 12/19/2007 • Special Programs Quality Review Report, Honors Program – 12/17-2007 • Special Programs Quality Review Report, Teacher Preparation, Educational Interpreter Training, and Paraprofessional Certificates Program – 12/04/2007 4.43

Mission of the Counseling Department I

4.44

Mission of the Counseling Department II

4.45

Mission of the Counseling Department III

4.46 Counseling Services — www.cypresscollegecounselor.edu 4.47 Counseling & Student Development Division Staff 4.48

Counselor Outreach

4.49

“LinkME to College”

4.50 Counseling & Student Development Division Meeting Minutes 4.51

Deans Advisory Council (DAC)

4.52

Counseling budget

4.53

Counselors Handbook

4.54 Counselor Training provided by the Offices of the Executive Vice President, Dean of Counseling & Student Development , and Dean of Student Support

155

Services 4.55 Collective Bargaining Agreement with the United Faculty

dures – www.nocccd.edu/Policies/PoliciesAndProcedures.htm#TheDistrict 4.82

State Law

4.56

Counseling Department Coordinator consultation

4.57

College Catalog

4.58

The Legacy Program brochure

4.84 MyGateway and/or Admissions and Records website

4.59

The Puente Program brochure

4.85

Admissions and Records

4.86

Admissions and Records Services

4.60 The College’s Diversity Committee in promotingdiversity minutes 4.61 The Diversity Committee’s monthly multiculturalcalendar 4.62 Eleven clubs on campus have a diversity-relatedfocus 4.63 The Campus Climate Survey — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rsurveys.aspx 4.64

California Education Code of regulations

4.65 Admissions and Records Office webpage — www. cypresscollege.edu/admissions/admissionsAndRecords 4.66

“Six Steps to Registration” handout

4.67

“Registration Q & A”

4.68

Vice Chancellor Memo on Priority Registration

4.69

CCCApply.org — www.cccapply.org/

4.70

MDTP test

4.71

CELSA test

4.72

CTEP test

4.83 Federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974

4.87 The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act can be found in the 2009-10 College Catalog 4.88

BANNER

4.89

Cypress College provisions

4.90

SSQR Schedule

4.91 myGateway: mygateway.nocccd.edu/cp/home/loginf 4.92

Rick Rams email to Cherie Dickey 7/6/10

4.93 Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation — www.mdrc.org/ 4.94 NOCCCD Board Minutes — www.nocccd.edu/ Trustees/MtgMinutesArchive2009.htm 4.95 Nichols and Nichols http://books.google.com/ books?hl=en&lr=&id=ocxqaZ0mvDUC&oi=fnd&pg= PA7&dq=nichols+five+column+model&ots=vfoD-rW rM8&sig=pnszk7Npn8dvdp9T9PDJaIeq6T0#v=one page&q&f=false

4.73 Student Services Quality Review Report for Admissions and Records 4.74

Matriculation Research Calendar

4.75 Student Grievances Campus Petitions Committee procedures 4.76

Campus Petitions Committee form

4.77

BANNER Login and Authentication Screen

4.78

BANNER Confidentiality Statement

4.79

BANNER Usage agreement in accord with AP 3720

4.80

Administrative Procedure AP 3720

4.81 NOCCCD Board Policies and Administrative Proce-

156

Cypress College

Standard IIC: Library and Learning Support Services Library and other learning support services for students are sufficient to support the institutionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s instructional programs and intellectual, aesthetic, and cultural activities in whatever format and wherever they are offered. Such services include library services and collections, tutoring, learning centers, computer laboratories, and learning technology development and training. The institution provides access and training to students so that library and other learning support services may be used effectively and efficiently. The institution systematically assesses these services using student learning outcomes, faculty input, and other appropriate measures in order to improve the effectiveness of the services. 1. The institution supports the quality of its instructional programs by providing library and other learning support services that are sufficient in quantity, currency, depth, and variety to facilitate educational offerings, regardless of location or means of delivery. 1.a. Relying on appropriate expertise of faculty, including librarians and other learning support services professionals, the institution selects and maintains educational equipment and materials to support student learning and enhance the achievement of the mission of the institution.

Descriptive Summary The Cypress College Library and Learning Resource Center (LLRC) opened January 2006 to accolades for its high tech, environmentally friendly design, coupled with a creative convergence of academic resources. The LLRC, a 62,500 sq. ft. facility, consists of two floors connected by a circular stairway and a central elevator. On the first floor, the Learning Resource Center (LRC) brings together a number of learning support services that, prior to 2006, were offered in different places across campus. In the new LRC, the Learning Center, Writing Center, Math Learning Center, Foreign Language Lab, and the Supplemental Instruction (SI) ProInstitutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

gram have been consolidated in order to address multiple student learning needs in one convenient location. The LRC features 159 computers where students have access to Internet, word processing (Microsoft Office), and printing. Two flatbed scanners with accompanying photo editing software are also available. Students may obtain a broad variety of academic support media placed in the LRC by instructors. Typically, students are using computers to complete instructional software programs, but the LRC also provides 48 CD and cassette tape players, 4 TV/VCR combos and 2 DVD players plus headphones for use with older instructional media. Tutors help students with a variety of subjects, including math, English, ESL, biology, chemistry, statistics, anatomy, physiology, geology, accounting, and Spanish. In addition to computer access, an array of solutions manuals, science models, texts, and handouts are available to students during their tutoring sessions. Supplemental Instruction Leaders prepare lessons for students in an office dedicated to their use; they also consult with their mentors and their coordinator. Finally, the LRC has a testing center where students can make up exams they have missed, ADA stations, and a computerized classroom that instructors can reserve for their classes. Faculty members determine what instructional materials and software programs are purchased for the LRC. They also influence what tutoring services are made available as well as which classes are supported by Supplemental Instruction. LRC staff include a learning center coordinator, an instructional assistant, three instructional aides, an SI coordinator, a tutorial services coordinator, two hourly employees, twenty-six tutors, and forty-five SI leaders. The LLRC dean oversees the personnel and activities of both floors. The second floor of the building is devoted to Library collections and services. According to their 2008-2009 Annual Report, (5.1) the Library owns 61,472 print volumes plus another 7,781 e-books, 1,307 CDs and cassettes, 3,268 videos and DVDs, 87 print periodical subscriptions, 3,444 reels of microfilm and 12 database subscriptions comprising approximately 7,910 full-text magazine/journal titles plus indexing and abstracting for many more. In addition to circulating and reference materials, the Library currently has 1,954 textbooks associated with current courses as well as materials put on reserve by instructors for supplemental reading or 157

viewing. Twenty-six computers (including one ADA station) are available in an open lab setting where students have access to Internet, library databases, Microsoft Office Word Viewer, and pay-for-print services, including three photocopiers and a microfilm reader/ printer. Another 35 computers are available for “hands on” instruction in the Library orientation classroom. Students can also use their own laptops as the building has wireless capability in addition to data ports and electrical availability throughout. Although most of the Library’s media collection can be checked out and taken home, many students, staff, and community members choose to use one of the eight combination VCR/ DVD players available in the Library. Current staff within the Library include three full-time librarians (a fourth has been hired to fill an open position beginning with the Fall 2010 semester), seven adjunct librarians (for a total of .7 FTEF), a Library Services Coordinator, four full-time Library Assistants, and three student assistants. Library materials are selected in accordance with the Library’s Collection Development Guidelines (5.2). The primary objective of the collection development program is to provide materials and equipment to support and meet the instructional, institutional, and individual needs of students, faculty, and staff. The selection process is a cooperative one involving both teaching and Library faculty and, as explicitly stated in the guidelines, “[f]aculty requests for the purchase of materials pertinent to their courses are given first consideration.” Librarians solicit input from faculty informally through emails Image 1 and personal conversations at the reference desk. They also accept donations for circulating and reserve materials directly from faculty, discuss the content instructor’s class assignments prior to Library orientation sessions, and visit department and division meetings as necessary. Librarians periodically offer a “Weed and Feed” event that provides lunch and flex credit to faculty from any discipline who are interested in spending two hours with a librarian reviewing holdings in their subject area, discarding out-of-date material, and discussing the replacement or purchase of new materials in print or other formats. Collection development in the health sciences occurs 158

more formally in the regular review of Library holdings during the accreditation process for individual programs. In addition, each year the campus Diversity Committee provides input into the selection of media addressing diversity issues along with $500 from their own budget towards those purchases. Finally, the campus Curriculum Committee’s review and approval process includes a requirement that faculty consult a librarian to determine whether Library materials need to be purchased to support a new or revised course (see Image 1 of CurricUNET screen shot). As a permanent member of the committee, the librarian has ample opportunity to review outlines and assignments related to any new courses or programs being submitted and to work with faculty to ensure appropriate and necessary materials are acquired to support these courses or programs. A number of Student Support Services covered in Standard IIB of this document also provide collections, computer labs, and services designed to support particular educational or occupational programs and goals. Since these resources must meet very specific

needs, materials and equipment are most often selected based on faculty input, student need, and discussions between front-line classified staff and supervising faculty within the division or department. The Career Planning and Adult Re-entry Center, Transfer Center, EOPS, DSPS, and a number of discipline-specific labs or libraries complement the materials and services provided by the LLRC and offer students various points of entry to learning resources across the campus. The Career Planning Center, located on the second floor of the Student Center, offers an extensive colCypress College

lection of occupational, labor market, and job search information to assist individuals with their career research. Students have in-house access to books, videos and career files plus 25 computer workstations offering licensed software programs and databases related to all aspects of career planning and job hunting. Many of these programs are also available remotely with a user id and password via a link from the Career Center website (5.21). The Transfer Center houses a transfer resource library including college catalogs, articulation agreements, reference books, college videos, and computer programs for student use. They share the 25 computer workstations with the Career Planning Center so that students can access web resources from the center or remotely via a link from their website (5.22). The Extended Opportunity Programs and Services (EOPS) and Disabled Students Program and Services (DSPS) programs are open to all students who qualify. Both programs are located in the Cypress College Complex, and both programs provide small labs with Internet access and word processing for their students. EOPS offers an inventory of used textbooks available on reserve, 13 computers, educational supplies such as flash drives, and tutoring through the LRC. The DSPS lab is equipped with 12 computers and specialized software such as screen readers for visual impairment plus limited free printing. The main purpose of the Business CIS Computer Lab is to provide hands-on practice for students enrolled in computer applications, networking, programming, web page design, and computer information systems classes, flexible time with extended hours for Business and CIS student use, and proctored testing for face to face and online CIS classes. A minimum of one faculty member is present at all times when the lab is open to students. Also, three instructional lab assistants are scheduled to support students and instructors. Overall, there are 81 computers and 3 high-speed networked printers available in the adjacent classroom, lab, and Testing Center. The computers have a broad range of software available for student usage. Three additional learning support resources deserve mention because of the unique way they meet the needs of students in specific programs. The Music Department maintains a music library with 5 computers and site licenses for Microsoft Finale music notation Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

software, 5 listening stations with tape and CD capability, 2 TV/VCR combos, headphones, periodicals, and a variety of music literature. The Nursing Department provides an open skills lab with five computers, various online resources, clinical equipment to support almost all patient care simulation activities plus books, software, and videos that support the nursing curriculum. The Dental Assisting and Dental Hygiene programs utilize a Perkins IV Grant to provide mentoring or tutoring for dental students who have low test scores, poor clinical performance, anxiety and/or difficulty with math. These students can spend additional time with a faculty member practicing clinical skills in the fully operational dental facility, review material from the small library of dental textbooks available in the department, or receive a referral to student services for study skills, including activities in the LLRC. Library and learning resources are developed and maintained in accordance with the Student Services Master Plan (SSMP) (5.3) and Direction Two of the Cypress College Strategic Plan (5.4). The LLRC participates along with all the student support services in a regular cycle of program review. The review process includes the distribution of point-of-service surveys designed to measure student satisfaction with the quality of library materials as well as with the number of databases, sufficiency of the print collection for research, and the number of textbooks on reserve for student use. The LRC and its Math Learning Center distribute similar surveys soliciting feedback regarding the quality of their materials as well as satisfaction with the number of computer stations, software programs, and availability of tutors. Library and LRC Student Services Quality Review Reports were completed in Spring 2007 (5.5, 5.6) and Fall 2009 (5.7, 5.8). Results from the Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory (5.9) (administered every two years) also help the institution gauge satisfaction with collections and services in the Library as well as the various computer labs, tutoring, and study areas mentioned earlier in this section. Librarians adhere to the evaluation criteria delineated in the Libraryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Collection Development Plan (5.2) to ensure the relevance, quality, depth, and diversity of the collection. In addition to consulting professional review publications such as Library Journal and Choice, they actively solicit donations and requests for purchase from faculty subject experts. Through the librarian representative on the Curriculum Committee, 159

they review proposals for new courses and programs to identify needs for additional library resources. Currently, the Library also subscribes to WorldCat Collection Analysis (WCA), a software program from the Online Computer Library Center, Inc., that allows users to determine their library’s subject-matter strengths and weaknesses as well as make comparisons to the collections of other institutions.

Self Evaluation Although the primary goal of student services programs other than the LLRC is not necessarily the provision of materials, student surveys administered during the program review process indicate at least a 90% satisfaction rate with the quality of materials these programs and services offer. On the other hand, in the LLRC, the provision of equipment and materials is top priority. Therefore, the LLRC does identify a single SLO in the Student Services Master Plan, which student satisfaction surveys are designed to measure: “students will experience satisfaction with the support received in the LLRC in terms of physical facilities, skilled and caring staff, services and tools that enhance academic advancement, and access to information required to meet their educational needs” (5.3). Previously, the College standard was met whenever 75% or more of responses fell in the “good” or “excellent’ categories. Beginning Spring 2010, the new standard compares the trend of responses in the “good” and “excellent” categories and analyzes the reasons for the change. In a comparative analysis of current results with the previous program review cycle, the LRC reports — in the combined “good/excellent” ratings — the overall quality of service is 94.6%, an improvement of 6.7% from Spring 2007. Quality of materials rates 92.3%, an increase of 7.6%. There is a significant decrease in satisfaction with the number of student computers (19.5%). This can be attributed to the significant increase in student use of the LRC: in the first three weeks of September in 2006, students visited the LRC 12,231 times: in 2009, they visited 15,395 times – an increase of 3,164 students. However, the number of available computers has not increased since the last program review (5.6, 5.8). Library program review shows — in the combined “good/excellent” ratings — the overall quality of service rates 95.4%, which is an improvement of 3.6% 160

from Spring 2007. Satisfaction with the quality of materials is up 6.6% to 93.5%. Combined “good/excellent” ratings for the number of databases and the print collection are 97.1% and 98%, respectively. Satisfaction with the number of textbooks on reserve is 88.8%. There was a significant decrease in satisfaction in the number of computer stations (14.4%); it is now 66.3%, which is below the College standard. This can be attributed to a significant increase in Library patronage: the turnstile count in September 2006 was 20,490; in September 2009 it was 34,297, an increase of 67%. Meanwhile, the number of computer stations has not changed (5.5, 5.7). Results of the Fall 2009 Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory indicate library resources and services as one of the areas of high importance and satisfaction that should be highlighted in the College’s promotional materials (5.9). In a somewhat contradictory finding compared to the LLRC program review, the adequacy and accessibility of computer labs are also listed as an area of high importance and satisfaction. Perhaps the high satisfaction applies specifically to labs such as Business/CIS that are available to students enrolled in specific programs only as compared to the open computer areas in the LLRC.

Planning Agenda None. 1.b. The institution provides ongoing instruction for users of library and other learning support services so that students are able to develop skills in information competency.

Descriptive Summary The mission of the Library and Learning Resource Center is to support the campus and community by encouraging life-long learning, including the abilities to locate, evaluate, and apply information to daily living (5.3). Library instruction occurs one-on-one at the reference desk, in 50-minute orientation sessions scheduled by faculty for their classes engaged in research assignments, via the Library’s online information literacy tutorial (TILT) available as a link from the Library’s website, and through the Library’s one-unit Library 100: Introduction to Research course (5.13). Many of the handouts and instructions used in teaching sessions are also available from the Library’s web page (5.23). Cypress College

A full-time, tenure track instruction librarian was hired in 2007 specifically to meet increased demand for research skills. The instruction program continues to grow. In Spring 2010, the Library offered four sections of LIB 100: two hybrid sections open to all students and two sections devoted to the Puente and the University Transfer Achievement Program (UTAP) learning communities. In addition, the instruction librarian has held training sessions for LRC tutors regarding Library resources. Under the guidance of the instruction librarian and using the American Library Association’s Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education (5.10), the Library has defined and assessed student learning outcomes for both the orientation program (5.11, 5.12) and its one-unit Library 100 course (5.13). Details of the assessments can be found on the College’s Tracdat database. Library SLOs will link to GE & Basic Skills PLOs, which in turn are related to the institutional learning outcomes. SLO is defined for the typical Library orientation lasting 50 minutes:

♦

During the research process, differentiate between the types of sources obtained, evaluate the quality and relevance of these sources to the research question, and revise the search strategy, if necessary, to obtain more relevant results to the research assignment criteria. Assessment includes in-class exercises and an annotated bibliography.

♦

When producing a research paper, correctly synthesize source material in a bibliography or a list of references according to a specified style manual, such as MLA or APA. Assessment includes in-class exercises, an annotated bibliography, and practical exams.

Self Evaluation

Assessment includes an in-class post-test given during the last five minutes of the session. Students must give the correct answer to at least 2 out of 3 questions, with an acceptable rate of 75% of students completing the task with a score of 2/3 or better.

Figures from the Library’s last three annual reports (2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009) (5.1, 5.14, 5.15) show reference librarians, on average, answer 22,000 questions and provide Library orientations for over 2,500 students each year. According to the LLRC’s 2009 program review, 97% of the users surveyed rated the responsiveness of librarians to research questions in the “good/excellent” category (5.7). SLOs for the Library’s orientation program were assessed in Fall 2007 and again in Spring 2008 (5.11, 5.12). A total of 368 students were assessed in 2007, and 325 students were assessed in 2008. Rates of students achieving an acceptable score were 80% and 86%, respectively. The first SLO cycle for Library 100 was completed in Spring 2009 (5.13). Three SLOs were assessed. In the case of the first two SLOs, 87% and 75% of students achieved the desired outcome. Only 72% of students achieved the desired outcome for the third SLO.

The one-unit Library 100 course specifies three student learning outcomes:

Planning Agenda

♦

Develop and implement an effective search strategy appropriate for an information need by

◊ differentiating among various types of information resources (specialized encyclopedias, article databases, library catalogs, search engines)

◊ understanding the purpose of each of the above resources

♦

After articulating a research need, construct and implement a search strategy using appropriate key concepts and terms in order to locate and retrieve books, articles, and authoritative web sites using a variety of library and Internet search tools. Assessment includes in-class exercises and an annotated bibliography.

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

None. 1.c. The institution provides students and personnel responsible for student learning programs and services adequate access to the library and other learning support services, regardless of their location or means of delivery.

161

Descriptive Summary The Library is open from 8:00 am – 9:00 pm, Monday through Thursday and 8:00 am – 1:00 pm on Fridays during Fall and Spring semesters. Summer hours are generally 11:00 am – 7:00 pm, Monday through Thursday when Summer School is in session. LRC (first floor) is open from 8:00 am – 9:00 pm, Monday through Thursday and 8:00 am – 5:00 pm on Fridays during Fall and Spring semesters. Summer hours are 8:00 am – 7:00 pm, Monday through Thursday when Summer School is in session. The Career Planning Center and Transfer Center are open from 8:00 am – 6:00 pm, Monday through Thursday and 8:00 am – noon on Friday. EOPS is open 8:00 am – 6:00 pm, Monday through Thursday and 8:00 am – noon on Friday. DSPS is open 8:00 am – 5:00 pm, Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, 8:00 am – 6:00 pm on Wednesday, and 8:00 am – noon on Friday. The Music Department Library is open 8:30 am – 1:30 pm, Monday through Thursday, 3:30 pm – 6:30 pm on Wednesday, and 3:30 pm – 4:30 pm on Thursday. The Business CIS Computer Lab is currently open 9:00 am – 9:00 pm, Monday through Thursday. Due to budget constraints and decreases, the hours of the lab are subject to change from one semester to another. Hours of the various health science labs vary by semester and mentoring activities. All registered students, faculty, and staff have 24/7 access to the Library’s catalog and full-text databases plus various instructional handouts and guides available from the Library’s website (5.23). The following databases are available anywhere on campus with Internet access or remotely with a simple login via the Library’s proxy server:

162

◊ EBSCOhost – includes general full-text databases, Business Source, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, Medline and other subject specific databases

◊

NewsBank – America’s Newspapers, including New York Times, Orange County Register, and other papers throughout the United States

◊

Proquest – Los Angeles Times and the historical New York Times from 1851

◊

CQ Researcher – In-depth reports on controversial and hot topics

◊

Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center – Pro & con on hot topics with full-text articles

◊

Gale Virtual Reference Library – full text articles from subject specific, scholarly encyclopedias

◊

Literature Resource Center – Biographies, literary criticism, and full-text periodical articles

◊

CountryWatch – Economic, political, and social data for every country in the world

◊

NetLibrary ebook Collection – Thousands of digital books available full-text and included in the Library’s catalog

◊

NoodleBib – Software program for creating bibliographies in MLA, APA, or Chicago/Turabian styles

Distance Education students and other remote users can find extensive help from the Library’s web page by clicking on the HOW DO I…? links or completing the Texas Information Literacy Tutorial (TILT) program which has been customized for the Cypress College Library. They can also contact a librarian by email, and a librarian will respond within 24 hours of the next business day, not including weekends and holidays. In a continuing effort to improve services to remote users, the Library recently purchased a subscription to LibGuides, a content management system that allows libraries to create and publish ADA/Section 508 compliant online research guides that are subject specific. According to a recent review posted on the Community College Library Consortium website (5.24), “Starting at the school’s LibGuides home page, students can find guides through a system search box or a subject directory. Students can also access guides via widgets that can be embedded into course management systems, blogs, other web sites and an application that can be added to their Facebook profiles.”

Cypress College

Self Evaluation

The Noel-Levitz Survey indicates students are satisfied with Library resources and services and the adequacy and accessibility of campus computer labs (5.9). In contrast, the Student Services Quality Review Reports generated by the LLRC show only 71% satisfaction rate with the Library’s hours of operation and a 63.7% satisfaction rate with the hours of operation in the Math Learning Center (part of the LRC) (5.8). Due to budget constraints, the Library closes at 1:00pm on Fridays; it is also closed on Saturdays. Librarians and LRC staff are acutely aware that access to learning resources and services is greatly enhanced by the use of current technology. As members of the Campus Computer Technology Committee, the Systems Librarian and the LRC instructional assistant ensure that librarians and LLRC staff stay informed about technological issues and activities on campus. They also bring the particular technological needs and concerns of the LLRC to the campus committee. The Library recently updated its own technology plan for 2009-2012 (5.16) and presented it to the Campus Computer Technology Committee, knowing that implementation of innovations in technology will require collaboration with the campus as a whole.

According to the Noel-Levitz Survey, students rated the safety of the campus and the adequacy of Library resources and computer labs as areas of high importance and high satisfaction (5.9). In addition, the Library’s recent program review indicates student satisfaction with pay-for-print and copier services exceeds the campus standard (5.7).

Planning Agenda

Descriptive Summary

None.

In an effort to provide students, faculty, and staff with maximum access to resources and materials for research, the Library provides reciprocal borrowing privileges with California State University Long Beach (5.17) and the CalWest Consortium of Cypress, Fullerton, Golden West, and Orange Coast Colleges (5.18). The four CalWest Consortium libraries contract, through North Orange County Community College District, with ExLibris for Voyager (5.19), the integrated library system. Interlibrary loan services, cataloging, and WorldCat Collection Analysis are provided through the Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) (5.20). Database purchases are made through the Community College League of California. As mentioned above, a 3M security system was installed when the LLRC was built. Xerox agreements cover pay-for-print and photocopier maintenance and services on both floors. The LRC also has subscriptions to Red Rock Software (Tutor-Trac), Plato, Ellis, and foreign language publishers. District Purchasing keeps copies of any relevant contracts or licenses related to these purchases.

1.d. The institution provides effective maintenance and security for its library and other learning support services.

Descriptive Summary Library and LRC material is protected by a 3-M book detection system. Photocopiers and the computer payfor-print system are maintained by Xerox. All learning resource areas are supported by Academic Computing and Media Services for overall upkeep and maintenance. Hardware upgrades, computer replacement, software licenses, and Internet access are supported centrally by Academic Computing. DSPS staff keep other learning resource staff apprised of ADA requirements. Learning resources faculty, staff, and instructional lab assistants ensure that the equipment functions properly and collaborate with the Academic Computing staff to provide timely technical support.

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Planning Agenda None. 1.e. When the institution relies on or collaborates with other institutions or other sources for library and other learning support services for its instructional programs, it documents that formal agreements exist and that such resources and services are adequate for the institution’s intended purposes, are easily accessible, and utilized. The performance of these services is evaluated on a regular basis. The institution takes responsibility for and assures the reliability of all services provided either directly or through contractual arrangement.

163

Self Evaluation No significant problems exist with the current contracts. Librarians review database usage statistics annually to inform decisions to renew databases or add new ones the following year. As discussed earlier, program review results indicate high levels of student satisfaction with Library materials as well as pay-for-print and photocopier services.

Planning Agenda None. 2. The institution evaluates library and other learning support services to assure their adequacy in meeting identified student needs. Evaluation of these services provides evidence that they contribute to the achievement of student learning outcomes. The institution uses the results of these evaluations as the basis for improvement.

Descriptive Summary Guided by the Educational Master Plan (EMP) (5.25), the LLRC as well as other learning support services are part of the Student Services Master Plan (5.3). Particular goals and objectives for both plans are articulated under Direction Two of the College’s Strategic Plan — Student Academic Support Services: “Developing and providing comprehensive student and academic support services to foster a positive and effective learning environment” (5.4). Every support service’s program review report (5.26) includes the results of a student satisfaction survey of the particular services provided, a summary of changes since the last review, a summary of student learning outcomes for the department, a description of the involvement of faculty/staff in the review process, a discussion of the standards that were or were not met, and whether or not the program’s goals and objectives were met in the previous review cycle. In addition, all learning support services identify the measurable objectives the areas plan to achieve within the next three years. Goals for the next year that require fiscal resources must also be submitted to the Planning and Budget Committee. The Library and the LRC have been through the cycle of program review twice. The Library functions as an area of instruction as well as a learning support service in conjunction with the 164

LRC. In 2006, the following SLO was developed for the combined LLRC: “Students will experience satisfaction with support received in the LLRC in terms of physical facilities, skilled and caring staff, services and tools that enhance academic advancement, and access to information required to meet their educational needs” (5.3). Results of the two program reviews demonstrate levels of student satisfaction in each of these areas (5.7, 5.8) while SLO assessments gauge levels of competency (5.12, 5.13). Two tools for scheduling and attendance logging analysis are being used to determine the impact of different LRC services on student academic success. A data gathering system called the Enterprise-Wide Positive Attendance Tracking and Accounting System (EWPATAS) has already been used to compare the success rates for students receiving supplemental instruction (SI) as opposed to those who have not. With funding from the Basic Skills Initiative and the STEM Grant, portable scanners have been purchased to expedite further tracking of SI’s impact on student success and to pilot what will ultimately be accomplished for tutoring and Library workshops. This will be the culmination of partnership between the LRC, the Library, Academic Computing, and the Office of Institutional Research and Planning. As an area of Instruction, the Library has also defined and assessed student learning outcomes for both the orientation program and its one-unit Library 100: Introduction to Research course. These SLOs are detailed in section IIC:1b of this document as well as the results from each assessment cycle.

Self Evaluation In its latest report on the effects of SI on 2005 students’ academic performance in Spring 2009, the Office of Institutional Research and Planning found that “students who attended an SI session had higher success rates than students in the same sections who did not attend an SI session”; “students who attended 12 or more hours of SI had higher success rates than those who attended SI for fewer than 12 hours and those who did not attend any SI”; and “students who attended more hours of SI were more likely to be successful than students who attended fewer hours of SI.” The success rate of students who did not attend SI was 42%; the success rate of students who attended more than 12 Cypress College

hours was 83%. Results of LLRC program reviews indicate a high level of student satisfaction in almost every area related to student learning outcomes. For example, overall quality of service in the LLRC exceeded 94 %. In the area of research, 93.5 % of students rated the quality of materials “good” or “excellent,” and an extremely high percentage of students find databases (97.1 %) and print collections (98 %) sufficient for research. In fact, apart from computer stations and hours of operation, the LLRC ratings exceeded the College standard (75%) in every area (5.7, 5.8). Evaluation of the Library’s instructional SLOs reveal that of the 693 students assessed over the course of 2007 and 2008 orientation sessions, an average of 83% met the assessment criteria, answering 2 out 3 questions correctly. For the Library 100: Introduction to Research course, three SLOs were assessed, with 87% and 75% of students achieving the desired outcome for the first two SLOs. For the third SLO, only 72% achieved the desired outcome.

Planning Agenda None.

vices Quality Review Report, 2009 — J:\Quality Review\Student Support Services Quality Review\2009-10 5.9 Results of Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rsurveys.aspx 5.10 American Library Association’s Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education 5.11 SLOs for the Library’s orientation program: assessed Fall 2007 5.12 SLOs for the Library’s orientation program: assessed Spring 2008 5.13 SLO cycle for Library 100: Introduction to Research was completed spring 2009 5.14

Library 2006-2007 Annual Report

5.15

Library 2007-2008 Annual Report

5.16

Library Technology Plan for 2009-2012

5.17 California State University Long Beach Reciprocal Borrowing Agreement 5.18 CalWest Consortium of Cypress, Fullerton, Golden West and Orange Coast Colleges 5.19 Contract, through North Orange County Community College District, with ExLibris (formerly Endeavor) for Voyager

Reference Documents 5.1

Library 2008-2009 Annual Report

5.2

Collection Development Guidelines

5.3 Student Services Master Plan — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments. aspx 5.4 Cypress College Strategic Plan — www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/Planning/StrategicPlan2008-2011Final.pdf 5.5 Library Student Support Services Quality Review Report, 2007 — J:\Quality Review\Student Support Services Quality Review\2006-2007 5.6 Learning Resource Center Student Support Services Quality Review Report, 2007 — J:\Quality Review\Student Support Services Quality Review\2006-2007

5.20 Interlibrary loan services, cataloging, and WorldCat Collection Analysis are provided through the Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) 5.21 Career Center website — www.cypresscollege. edu/services/cpc/computerizedInformation.aspx 5.22 Transfer Center website — www.cypresscollege. edu/services/transfer/resources 5.23 Cypress College Library website — www.cypresscollege.edu/library 5.24 Community College Library Consortium website www.cclibraries.org/reviews/ 5.25 Educational Master Planwww.cypresscollege.edu/ about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 5.26 Program Review Reports http://www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ProgramReview

5.7 Library Student Support Services Quality Review Report, 2009 — J:\Quality Review\Student Support Services Quality Review\2009-10 5.8 Learning Resource Center Student Support Ser-

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

165

Standard III Resources

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

167

Standard IIIA: Human Resources The Institution employs qualified personnel to support student learning programs and services wherever offered and by whatever means delivered, and to improve institutional effectiveness. Personnel are treated equitably, are evaluated regularly and systematically, and are provided opportunities for professional development. Consistent with its mission, the institution demonstrates its commitment to the significant educational role played by persons of diverse backgrounds by making positive efforts to encourage such diversity. Human resource planning is integrated with institutional planning. People are the most important asset to any successful organization. Cypress College is no different. In order to meet its core value of excellence, job descriptions appropriately reflect the duties and responsibilities of each position. There is a diligence to assure that prospective employees have the necessary qualifications for the position. This is accomplished through planning, a wide range of recruitment activities, trained hiring committees, and teaching demonstrations for faculty positions. Ongoing training assures that faculty and staff have current skills to meet the demands of their positions and to meet the needs of students. Periodic surveys are completed to assess the needs of the faculty and staff. This information is used to help improve the campus climate and achieve the mission of the College. 1. The institution assures the integrity and quality of its programs and services by employing personnel who are qualified by appropriate education, training, and experience to provide and support these programs and services.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College is committed to its core value of excellence; therefore, one of its top priorities is to assure that its personnel are fully qualified for the positions. Qualified personnel are necessary to ensure excellence and integrity of all programs and services that the College provides to its students. Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

In all positions, the hiring committee is responsible for reviewing the job descriptions and desirable qualifications. If any additional desirable qualifications are added, they first need to be approved by the District Office of Human Resources. This process is designed to verify that both the duties and qualifications match each position. All hiring committee members are required to attend training from District Human Resources staff before serving on a hiring committee. For classified and management positions, job descriptions are approved per Board policies AP 71203 Classified Employee Hiring (6.5) and AP 7120-4 Management Employee Hiring (6.5). All duties and qualifications of the job are carefully designed to set the standards for hiring the best qualified applicants. In 2003, the District assessed all classified positions throughout the District to determine if job classifications and duties were proper for the positions. All reclassification results were presented to the Board on June 24, 2003 (6.16). To be eligible for employment in a full-time or an adjunct faculty position with the District, including substitute, the minimum qualifications established by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges for the academic discipline must be satisfied. The equivalency requirements can be determined according to the Districtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s equivalency requirements and procedure AP 7210-1 Equivalency (6.5). Complying with these policies ensures that Cypress College hires qualified personnel for its programs and services.

Self Evaluation The College develops the personnel positions based on its program needs, duties, and qualifications required. The procedures for hiring faculty are established and implemented in accordance with Board policies and procedures. The procedures for hiring classified employees and management employees are established per the procedures outlined in Board Policies 7120-3 and 7120-4 (6.5).

Planning Agenda None. 1.a. Criteria, qualifications, and procedures for selection of personnel are clearly and pub169

licly stated. Job descriptions are directly related to institutional mission and goals and accurately reflect position duties, responsibilities, and authority. Criteria for selection of faculty include knowledge of the subject matter or service to be performed (as determined by individuals with discipline expertise), effective teaching, scholarly, and potential to contribute to the mission of the institution. Institutional faculty plays a significant role in selection of new faculty. Degrees held by faculty and administrators are from institutions accredited by recognized U.S. accrediting agencies. Degrees from non-U.S. institutions are recognized only if equivalence has been established.

Descriptive Summary All job descriptions reflect the duties and responsibilities of the position. Classified and management position descriptions are approved by the District Office of Human Resources. Faculty job descriptions may be modified to suit current needs in the field. When departments identify needs to fill vacant or to add new faculty positions, the requests are submitted to the College Faculty Prioritization Committee, which is made up of the division deans, the Executive Vice President, and three representatives from Academic Senate. The requests are prioritized and sent to the Planning and Budget Committee, which, subsequent to presentation and discussion, makes its recommendation to the President’s Advisory Cabinet. In accord with the priorities established in this collaborative process, when a position from the list is approved to be filled, a hiring committee is established. Per Board Policy AP 7120-1 Tenure Track Faculty Hiring (6.5) and AP 7120-2 Adjunct Faculty Hiring (6.5), all hiring committees for faculty include faculty members. Before the position is advertised, the hiring committee develops the paper screening criteria and interview questions based on the approved job description. Job openings are advertised through the use of mailing lists, advertising in journals, general circulation, and posting on internal and external websites. The goal is to attract applicants from diverse backgrounds including, but not limited to, listings with the California Community College Faculty and Staff Diversity Registry organization. When all applications are received, the hiring commit170

tee paper screens the applications and decides which candidates to interview. Effective teaching is judged as part of the interview process. The finalists are required to perform a teaching demonstration in the subject of their discipline. They should be accurate and clear in explaining the material as well as demonstrate clear communication skills. Usually, both the application and resume provide insights to the candidate’s scholarly orientation. This is also evaluated during the hiring process. The committee may also ask questions regarding the candidate’s scholarship in the interview process. However, these are secondary considerations because the priority is to select faculty based on the candidate’s teaching skills and knowledge. After the interview and evaluation, the hiring committee makes recommendations to the Executive Vice President and the President, who interview the final candidates. The candidate who will be offered the position is determined between the hiring committee and the administrators. In order to qualify for employment in a faculty position, minimum qualifications for the academic discipline must be satisfied or the equivalency requirement must be met according to the District’s equivalency procedure AP 7210-1 (6.5). All course work and degrees used to meet the minimum qualifications must be from accredited institutions. Equivalency of foreign degrees are determined according to the District’s equivalency requirements and procedure. The District Equivalency Committee, which consists of management and faculty from all three institutions of the District, determine the documentation submitted by the candidates. In addition to the minimum qualifications mentioned, applicants must include a current, valid certificate to work, a license to practice in California, or other qualifications that are essential for effective instruction. In the hiring process, the District asks applicants to submit official or unofficial academic transcripts of undergraduate and graduate courses. Any licenses or certificates that are required for the employment must also be submitted. Candidates who are selected for employment must provide official transcripts and documentation of licenses or certificates. The District verifies the degree from non-U.S. institutions in the American Council on Educations’ Directory of Accredited Institutions of Postsecondary Education. If the degrees are not listed in that direcCypress College

tory, they are then referred to the District Equivalency Committee for evaluation in accordance with the District equivalency procedures. If necessary, transcripts are submitted to a foreign credential evaluation service for assessment. The success of the College’s hiring processes can be assessed by the outcome of the performance evaluation of its employees. Tenure review is a four-year process, which is outlined in Article 17 of the United Faculty Collective Bargaining Agreement (6.15). This allows adequate time for tenured faculty to evaluate the performance reviews on their new colleagues and for recently hired faculty to improve their skills. All employees who are selected to serve on the hiring committees must have Equal Opportunity Employment Training that is provided by District Human Resources Department staff. They are then eligible to serve on hiring committees for two years. After the two-year period, the employees must receive additional training to serve on a subsequent hiring committee. This training includes diversity and required EEO training, federal/ state laws, District policies, the hiring process.

Self Evaluation The District has built a strong and effective selection process in hiring highly qualified employees. The District has four different hiring procedures: AP 7120-1 Tenure Track Faculty Hiring Procedure, AP 7120-2 Adjunct Faculty Hiring Procedure, AP 7120-3 Classified Employee Hiring, and AP 7120-4 Management Employee Hiring (6.5). Each of the procedures is well defined and available to all employees.

Planning Agenda None. 1.b. The institution assures the effectiveness of its human resources by evaluating all personnel systematically and at stated intervals. The institution establishes written criteria for evaluating all personnel, including performance of assigned duties and participation in institutional responsibilities and other activities appropriate to their expertise. Evaluation processes seek to assess effectiveness of personnel and encourage improvement. Actions taken following evaluations are formal, timeInstitutional Self Study — Spring 2011

ly, and documented.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College follows Board Policy and Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs), where applicable, to ensure the effectiveness of its human resources by employing established evaluation procedures. Appropriate institutional responsibilities have been developed in accord with Policy and CBAs based on established Human Resources practices. In April 2003, the District completed and implemented a classification study that assessed the job titles, duties, and relative compensation of all classified bargaining unit positions within the District (6.16). Also, in 2006, the District conducted a study of all management classifications, which included a market analysis of salaries for comparable duties. The study and new salary schedule were approved at the June 13, 2006, Board meeting with a retroactive implementation date of July 1, 2005 (6.47). In 2009, the Vice Chancellor of Human Resources convened a District Management Association committee to evaluate and rewrite the Management Evaluation instrument. The committee met for over a year and submitted a final Management Evaluation instrument for consideration; however, this instrument has not yet been adopted by the District’s governance committees. The new instrument will be submitted for approval to Chancellor’s Staff, Chancellor’s Cabinet, and subsequently to the Board by the Vice Chancellor of Human Resources. Implementation is expected in July 2011 (6.48). Members of all employee groups are provided copies of job descriptions and evaluation forms in advance of the evaluation process so that they know what criteria will be used to determine their effectiveness. As detailed in Board Policies and Collective Bargaining Agreements, all employees are evaluated periodically for the purposes of acknowledging satisfactory and excellent job performance, identifying areas where improvement is needed, and developing a timeframe and criteria for establishing that job performance has improved where needed. Administrators are evaluated every year by their immediate manager, including a comprehensive evaluation every three years per AP 7210-7 (6.5). Each Fall, deans are required to submit goals and objectives for their division to the Executive Vice President. These are to be written in consideration of student success and College planning docu171

ments, including the Education Master Plan, Strategic Plan, and Program Reviews, and are also evaluated by the Executive Vice President. Newly-hired probationary full-time faculty members are evaluated by a Tenure Review Committee in each year of their four-year probationary period commencing with the first semester of service. The Tenure Review Committee composition, requirements, and expectations are detailed in section 17.6 of the Agreement between United Faculty and the NOCCCD (6.15). In the first year of service, probationary faculty are evaluated in the Fall and Spring semesters. Student evaluations are conducted for all classes taught as part of the faculty’s regular load. In the second and subsequent years of probationary service, faculty members are evaluated in the Fall semesters only, with student evaluations administered in not less than 40% of their assigned sections (6.15). Regular full-time faculty are evaluated every three years subsequent to receiving tenure. Adjunct faculty members are evaluated once in their first two semesters of employment and then once every three years thereafter (6.19). Classified employees are evaluated during their probationary period (at the end of four months, eight months, and two weeks prior to the end of the 12-month probationary period) and then every two years thereafter (6.20). These evaluations are intended to “strengthen communication between the Unit Member and the Immediate Management Supervisor,” to provide “a useful and substantive assessment of performance,” to document and provide “recognition and acknowledgment of good performance,” and to provide for “enhancement of performance by identification of areas needing improvement” (6.20) (CBA, Article 19, Section 19.1.1.1) The process of classified evaluation is coordinated by the District Office of Human Resources and administered at each of the District sites with provisions of the CBA. The Office of Human Resources routinely holds training sessions for all managers charged with conducting employee evaluations. The training sessions occur with the release of a newly negotiated collective bargaining agreement or in accord with current evaluation cycles. Written evaluation forms have been developed utilizing shared-governance processes and have been Board approved and/or agreed to as part of the collective bargaining process in the case of all groups except for administration (6.5, 6.15, 6.19, and 6.20). With each new fiscal year, at the beginning of the Fall 172

semester, the Executive Vice President’s office sends the deans a Faculty Evaluation Schedule that shows all full-time faculty to be evaluated in that fiscal year and whether each faculty member is in the probationary faculty evaluation process or the regular faculty evaluation proces (6.49). The Cypress College Personnel Assistant receives all completed faculty evaluations and forwards them to the Executive Vice President for review and signature. The Executive Vice President then sends them to District Human Resources for review. College deans and District Office of Human Resources personnel monitor and track timelines for adjunct faculty evaluations. The Executive Vice President’s office and District HR monitor and track timelines for successful completion of the evaluations for probationary faculty, regular faculty, classified employees, and managers (6.25, 6.26, 6.27, 6.28). Employee evaluation procedures are in place to recognize, document, and encourage excellence in job performance. Evaluation instruments are also used to communicate when performance does not meet acceptable standards. If an employee receives a “needs improvement” or “unsatisfactory” rating, s/he will be re-evaluated in accord with timelines established in the appropriate CBA or District Policy evaluation procedures. The employee is also provided with an improvement plan. Monitoring of progress toward the established improvement goals occurs in accord with CBA and/or District Policy evaluation requirements. In cases where improvement is not forthcoming, College managers coordinate appropriate responses with the District Office of Human Resources. Subsequent to an evaluation and articulation of an improvement plan, specific areas of deficiency are noted, criteria for improvement are stated, and a timeline for improvement is implemented.

Self Evaluation Evaluations for all groups — classified staff, adjunct faculty, tenure-track probationary faculty, tenured faculty, and management — are conducted in a timely and professional manner. At the beginning of the Fall semester, the Executive Vice President’s office sends notices to all deans indicating which probationary and tenured faculty are to be evaluated during the fiscal year. It is the responsibility of the deans to track when adjunct faculty are due for a three-year evaluation. The District Office of Human Resources sends Cypress College

out a yearly notice to all managers indicating which classified staff are to be evaluated during the current fiscal year. At Cypress College, all completed evaluations are sent to the Personnel Assistant, who forwards them to the office of the Executive Vice President for review before forwarding them to the District Office of Human Resources. Administrators receive training in personnel evaluations each year. The training is conducted by the Director of Human Resources or his designee. Adjunct faculty evaluations are conducted by deans or department coordinators who have also received training and instruction from the deans. Peer evaluations are a component of regular faculty evaluations and are coordinated by the faculty members involved. The deans are available to offer assistance and answer questions regarding the correct forms and processes when consulted in this instance. The District Office of Human Resources routinely notifies administrators when evaluation forms have been updated. Evaluation forms for adjunct faculty, probationary faculty, and regular faculty have been updated to include issues specific to online instruction. Although processes have not been formally negotiated for the evaluation of online classes contained in faculty assignments, Cypress College approved the Distance Education Plan (6.50), which includes information on the evaluation of online courses and also includes a process for conducting student evaluations online. For regular faculty evaluations, in accord with the CBA provisions, student evaluations and comments are not included in the management evaluation report. The Distance Education Coordinator administers student evaluations in order to maintain instructor confidentiality of student evaluations of online courses. The deans have requested that the evaluation of online courses be negotiated since it is currently possible for tenured faculty to teach online without ever having instruction of an online course evaluated. Deans have also requested that they would like to have review of student evaluations and comments as a component for all tenured faculty evaluations. Administrators are the only District employee group evaluated every year. One of the reasons that the Vice Chancellor of Human Resources convened the committee to revise the management evaluation form was to rectify this inequity. As he goes forward with this iniInstitutional Self Study — Spring 2011

tiative, it is recommended by the District Management Association that the evaluation of managers who have completed a probationary period will be conducted at three-year intervals in accord with procedures in place for regular faculty. However, before revised processes and forms go into effect, they must first be evaluated by the District Management Association and the college presidents/provost. Changes in administrative evaluation procedures would also require formal approval of the governing board. Cypress College utilizes employee evaluation processes as a significant component of continuous improvement of performance and services. The College recognizes its human resources as the most valuable of its commodities.

Planning Agenda None. 1.c. Faculty and others directly responsible for student progress toward achieving stated student learning outcomes have, as a component of their evaluation, effectiveness in producing those learning outcomes.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College Focused Mid-Term Report of 2008 included the following planning agenda item: “The College will recommend that the District negotiate changes with the two faculty unions so that effectiveness in achieving Student Learning Outcomes becomes a component of faculty evaluation” (6.29). Subsequently, the College forwarded a request to the District for consideration at the collective bargaining table. A critical examination of language used to describe SLOs in ACCJC’s Guide to Evaluating Institutions (6.30) indicates that institutional self-analysis that leads to improvement of all activities pertaining to teaching and learning is the underlying theme. Cypress College has consistently emphasized its commitment to the SLO process over the last eight years. The College has articulated institutional learning outcomes, appointed an SLO Coordinator, established a core team to guide the SLO development process, formed an Expanded SLO Committee to facilitate dialogue on SLOs on the campus, purchased centralized assessment management software (TracDat), and trained full-time faculty 173

on using TracDat to manage SLOs. In addition, faculty members within each department collaborate to develop SLOs and PLOs. A college-wide committee comprised of faculty from different divisions developed General Education & Basic Skills PLOs, which were approved by the Academic Senate in Spring 2010. As of October of 2010, 85% of all College courses have defined SLOs. The dialogue regarding SLOs took place in several College forums and Leadership Team meetings (6.51). The discussion on SLOs is featured in the Student Services area as well. All of the student services units have defined SLOs for their respective areas and are engaged in measuring the effectiveness of SLOs.

Self Evaluation Cypress College has identified methods to evaluate programs based on their effectiveness in achieving student learning outcomes. The development of SLOs and PLOs and implementation of the SLO process are faculty responsibilities. Most of the process has occurred at the individual, team and/or department level, where faculty have identified course SLOs and assessment methods, analyzed data, and completed reports. Each department is responsible for developing assessment methodology, timelines, and evaluation processes. Since articulation of this planning agenda, Cypress College faculty have been engaged in activities, including departmental planning and program review and development and assessment of General Education and Basic Skills Program Learning Outcomes to evaluate the effectiveness of established SLOs to improve learning and teaching. These ongoing initiatives demonstrate the strong commitment of Cypress College to put SLOs at the center of the institutionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s key processes.

Planning Agenda None. 1.d. The institution upholds a written code of professional ethics for all of its personnel.

Descriptive Summary The College currently has an Administrative Guide for Code of Ethics for Faculty, which was adapted from the Board Policies and Administrative Procedures for174

mat. Also, Administrative Procedure 7210-5 Faculty Code of Ethics (6.5) is currently under construction. In Spring 2010, the Board adopted Institutional Code of Ethics BP/AP 3050, which states that the North Orange County Community College District upholds a written code of professional ethics for all of its personnel. The comprehensive language of this Boardapproved policy establishes standards of ethical conduct that apply to and encompass all District employee groups.

Self Evaluation In Fall 2009, the College conducted its bi-annual Climate Survey. It was conducted in Fall instead of the usual Spring timeframe so that the results could be used for the accreditation self study. Total responses of 441 were received, which was up by nearly 30% compared to the previous survey. The electronic survey was sent to all employees of Cypress College. Overall, the College atmosphere and diversity-related areas were ranked more positively compared to the previous survey. Campus climate surveys are conducted regularly on campuses across the nation. Fall 2009 marked the fifth time that such a study was conducted at Cypress College. Like the earlier studies, its purpose was to gain a better understanding of employeesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; satisfaction with the general working environment at the College. More employees reported a positive feeling related to the general College atmosphere compared to the previous study. Similarly, more employees also felt that the College has a strong commitment to supporting diversity activities that address issues relevant to gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgender employees and students than in the 2008 study. Responses with the highest agreement ratings demonstrate strengths of the College, as the employees see them, suggesting a respectful campus in which minority status does not factor into career decisions. Comparisons between employee groups provide a much more thorough understanding of the survey results. There were differences on the ratings, primarily related to employee groups (administrators/ managers had differing agreement levels than faculty or staff) and disability status. Administrators/managers, full-time faculty, and those who participate in at least one shared-governance committee were more likely to agree to almost all quesCypress College

tions related to decision-making, job satisfaction, and planning than, respectively, faculty or staff, part-time faculty, or those who are not a shared-governance committee member. A source of pride for Cypress College is that the majority of employees believe that diversity and the College’s atmosphere have improved, and employees believe that Cypress College is truly an equal-opportunity institution.

Planning Agenda None. 2. The institution maintains a sufficient number of qualified faculty with full-time responsibility to the institution. The institution has a sufficient number of staff and administrators with appropriate preparation and experience to provide the administrative services necessary to support the institution’s mission and purposes.

Descriptive Summary Staffing needs are determined by a variety of factors that incorporate data, surveys, and plans such as the Department Planning and Program Review (6.3) and the Educational Master Plan (6.1), using standard procedures developed and practiced by each academic division or service area. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning maintains databases of information collected from various campus climate surveys and keeps track of the numbers and types of faculty and staff employed at the College. At the time of this writing, Cypress College has 208 full-time faculty and 428 part-time faculty (6.14). Several Cypress College departments participating in Program Review for 2006-2007 and 2008-2009 (6.3) indicated that the hiring of additional full-time, tenure track faculty was among their goals for the next three years (6.14). Program Reviews also frequently list the need for more clerical, hourly, and other support staff. The faculty and directors of these programs are concerned with achieving and maintaining sufficient fulltime faculty and support staff. In the current difficult financial situation, only the most direly needed positions are being filled, and some administrative positions are being combined (e.g. Dean of Language Arts taking Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

over L/LRC instead of hiring new L/LRC Dean) and staff are filling vacant positions on a temporary basis (e.g. Social Science DOM retired, SS Administrative Assistant become temporary DOM, while temporary Administrative Assistant funded with “back-fill” money replaced her). The qualifications for administrators and support staff are developed by NOCCCD Human Resources in collaboration with other appropriate personnel. The hiring procedures are described in NOCCCD Administrative Procedures AP 7120 and Board Policies BP 7120 (6.5). Normative evaluation procedures described in AP 7130-7 and AP 7110-7 (6.5) and appropriate negotiated contracts (e.g. United Faculty, CSEA, and AdFac) outline evaluation procedures designed to ensure the continued qualifications of staff, management, and faculty over time. Working within the normal practices and procedures for each academic division or service area, administrators develop hiring recommendations. Justifications for personnel increases come from the need to replace retirees, enrollment data (FTES, 5 year trends, etc.), dialogue among existing personnel, Program Review action plans, the Educational Master Plan, Student Services Master Plan, Department Planning, externally imposed load limitations, whether it will enhance student transfer and/or occupational opportunities, and the general availability of qualified adjunct faculty. Recommendations are sent to the Planning and Budget Committee, and then forwarded to the President’s Advisory Cabinet for final approval (6.8).

Self Evaluation According to the California Community College Chancellor’s Office June 2005 report from the “Workgroup on 75/25 Issues” (6.21), the most current comment on the issue, the California Community Colleges have a very difficult time obtaining and maintaining compliance with the 75/25 obligation (AB 1725). The Chancellor’s Office recommends that districts continue to work toward the goal, but recognizes that lack of funding is generally the impediment. The Chancellor’s Office developed the Faculty Obligation Number (FON) for each district in California, based on the number of faculty each district had in 1988, when AB 1725 was passed and signed into law. The NOCCCD felt that this number was unfairly high. 175

Several years ago, the District in collaboration with the academic senates at both campuses, worked with the Chancellor’s Office to renegotiate the FON (6.17). The organization and hierarchy of administration and staff is generally decided based upon need and what makes logical sense. The College strives to maintain the same number of faculty and staff, making efforts to fill vacancies. However, changes are made based upon growth or decline of a program or service area, and added requirements based upon accreditation recommendations or changes in the Education Code. Budget and other financial issues also influence organizational changes. Every few years, departments submit clerical requests to a shared-governance committee, which prioritizes them for hiring, if money is available (6.18). The 2008 Campus Climate Survey (6.7) indicates 31.6% of employees in all categories feel considerable pressure to accomplish too many objectives and priorities. This might be interpreted to mean that these employees would like to have additional staff to help get their work accomplished or that the way the work is organized/assigned is inefficient. The 2007 Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory (6.6) found that on the whole, Cypress College students are very satisfied with how the College is organized and staffed by reporting extremely high satisfaction ratings on things such as: Academic Advising/Counseling, Instructional Effectiveness, Academic Services, Admissions and Financial Aid, and Campus Support Services. The Institutional Effectiveness Report (IER) (6.14) discusses the results of the Student Services Quality Review. The 2006-2007 IER reported high student satisfaction for CalWORKS, CARE, DSPS, EOPS, and Library/Learning Resource Center. The IER results of the Student Services Quality Review reported that campus employees were very satisfied (at least 75%) with all of the following: Academic Computing and Media Services, Bookstore, Bursar, Campus Safety, Institutional Research, and Production Center. In 2008-2009, Student Support Services in Admissions and Records, Assessment, and Financial Aid met or exceeded the 75% student satisfaction benchmark.

Planning Agenda None. 3. The institution systematically develops per176

sonnel policies and procedures that are available for information and review. Such policies and procedures are equitably and consistently administered.

Descriptive Summary In furtherance of its core value of excellence and to fulfill the College’s vision — “A premier learning community recognized for supporting student success and enriching society” — Cypress College employs diverse faculty, staff, and administrators who are qualified by appropriate education, training, and experience to support the College’s student learning programs and services. The District systematically develops and updates personnel policies and procedures that are reviewed by the Chancellor’s Cabinet (which consists of representatives from all constituency groups) prior to submission to the Board of Trustees for adoption. The District’s personnel policies and administrative procedures are posted on the District’s website (Board Policies and Administrative Procedures, Section 7, Human Resources). Additional personnel procedures are contained in the negotiated collective bargaining agreements between the District and the exclusive representatives of its fulltime faculty, adjunct faculty, and classified employees. The collective bargaining agreements between the District and United Faculty (6.15), Adjunct Faculty United (6.19), and the California School Employees Association (6.20) are provided to employees and are also posted on the District’s website. The District Office of Human Resources and the Office of Equity and Diversity monitor District personnel policies and procedures and the collective bargaining agreements to ensure consistent and equitable application. Managers and other personnel are provided with appropriate training regarding the District’s personnel policies and procedures and collective bargaining agreements.

Self Evaluation The District has established appropriate written personnel policies and procedures, which have been reviewed by the Chancellor’s Cabinet and approved by the Board of Trustees. These policies and procedures are reviewed and revised as necessary in response to environmental changes. The District provides approCypress College

priate training and monitoring to ensure consistent and equitable application.

Planning Agenda None. 3.a. The institution establishes and adheres to written policies ensuring fairness in employment procedures.

Descriptive Summary Board Policy 3410 (6.5) articulates the District’s commitment to equal opportunity in educational programs, employment, and all access to institutional programs and activities. Administrative Procedure 3410 (6.5) states the District’s commitment to provide equal employment opportunities to all applicants and employees regardless of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical or mental disability, medical condition, marital status, gender, age, sexual orientation, or military status. The provisions of AP 3410 (6.5) also provide that all employment decisions shall be based on job-related criteria that are responsive to the District’s needs. The District adheres to its established written procedures for the employment of full-time faculty (AP 7120-1), adjunct faculty (AP 7120-2), classified employees (AP 7120-3), and management employees (AP 7120-4) (6.5). The District Office of Human Resources and the Office of Equity and Diversity provide training to hiring committees and monitor all hiring processes from recruitment to selection to ensure consistent applications. HR has an extensive list of diversity-related organizations and communication groups that open position announcements are sent to.

Self Evaluation The District has established written employment policies and procedures, which support equal opportunity in employment and fairness in employment procedures. Hiring committees are provided with training regarding employment procedures, and hiring processes are monitored by the District Office of Human Resources and the Office of Equity and Diversity to ensure fairness and consistent application of procedures.

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Planning Agenda None. 3.b. The institution makes provisions for the security and confidentiality of personnel records in accordance with the law.

Descriptive Summary Employee personnel records are maintained in a secured area of the District Office of Human Resources in locked cabinets. Employee personnel files are maintained in confidence in accordance with law and are accessible only to the employees themselves or to authorized personnel, when necessary, in the proper administration of the District’s affairs. Employee personnel records are categorized as Class 1 records as provided in AP 3310 (6.5) and are permanently retained by the District.

Self Evaluation Personnel records are properly secured and confidentially maintained by the District Office of Human Resources in accordance with law.

Planning Agenda None. 4. The institution demonstrates through policies and practices an appropriate understanding of and concern for issues of equity and diversity.

Descriptive Summary The College’s Mission Statement is explicit: “the College is committed to…embracing diversity” (6.35). Two of the most relevant values listed in the District’s Strategic Plan (6.34) are “respect” and “inclusiveness.” The Educational Master Plan 2006-2016 (6.1) states as one of its core values: “Inclusiveness – a community that embraces diverse individuals; provides an accessible, supportive climate; and encourages a variety of perspectives and opinions.” The College has a shared-governance committee chaired by the President that meets regularly to discuss the College environment with respect to diversity and exploration of avenues to improve it. The commit177

tee members represent different constituencies on the campus. The College sponsors a variety of speakers and activities related to diversity throughout the academic year (6.31). Over the past several years, engaging speakers have addressed a packed theater: James Houston, coauthor of Farewell to Manzanar; Bacon Sakatani on WWII Japanese internment camps; and author and columnist, Gustavo Arellano. Staff Development also offers workshops related to diversity. Recent events have included programs on Learning Disabilities; Brain Research and Its Impact on Learning; Generational Differences in the Workplace; and Learning Styles. In addition, the District Office of Equity and Diversity sponsored the visit of an anti-racist speaker, Tim Wise, and Sultan Sharrief, writer/director of the film Bilalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Stand (6.36). The North Orange County Community College District (NOCCCD) recently hosted the first-ever collaborative conference of the Western Region Council on Black Affairs and the African American Male Education Network & Development in November 2009, hosting administrators, faculty, staff, and students from as many as fifteen community college districts in eleven western states (6.36). The Curriculum Committee encourages faculty to include multicultural components in their course outlines if they are warranted within a specific course. The committee does look closely at course outlines that are submitted to meet the Cultural Diversity requirement. In order to meet the Cultural Diversity criteria, the majority of the course must focus on multicultural issues in America or issues dealing with race, ethnicity, or culture in America (6.52).

Self Evaluation Cypress College encourages enrollment that represents the diversity of its community. Approximately 63% of the Collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s students are from traditionally underrepresented groups. According to the 2000 U.S. Census, the percentages of Asians and African Americans are higher at the College than the percentages of Orange County residents. In the Student Satisfaction Survey conducted in Fall 2009, the general opinion of students indicated that they felt welcomed on the campus, irrespective of their background.

178

The College has increased the proportion of students aged 30-39 in the last two years. The average student is 26, 22% are over 30, and the oldest student is 89 years young. Staff and Faculty-- Although the majority of employees are White (64%), many other ethnicities are represented among faculty, staff, and administrators at Cypress College; 15% are Hispanic and Asian (including Filipino and Pacific Islander). Compared to 2007, the proportion of White employees decreased by 3 percentage points) but held steady between 2008 and 2009. The results of the Climate Survey (employees) and Student Satisfaction Survey both suggest that Cypress College welcomes everyone irrespective of their race or ethnicity. Moreover, the climate survey results indicate that the perception of employees regarding diversity has improved since the last survey. In the Climate Survey conducted in Fall 2009, it was noted that more employees expressed positive feelings related to the general College atmosphere since the previous study in 2008. Similarly, more employees also felt that the College has a strong commitment to supporting diversity activities that address issues relevant to gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgender employees and students than in the 2008 study. A substantial portion of the survey focused on employeesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; perceptions of how responsive the College is to its diverse students and staff. Analyses looked at items related to gender, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability, and general diversity, as described below (6.7). Overall, the campus atmosphere related to diversity has improved since the last survey although agreement levels vary among different groups. Also, none of the areas were perceived overwhelmingly negatively (below 60% score on Agree/Strongly Agree) by any of the groups. While the campus has improved the perception towards diversity, the good work needs to continue to strengthen the position.

Planning Agenda None. 4.a. The institution creates and maintains appropriate programs, practices, and services that support its diverse personnel.

Cypress College

Descriptive Summary The College is committed to maintaining programs, practices, and services to support the diversity of its personnel. According to the District Office of Equity and Diversity, the faculty are represented by the following groups: Black Faculty/Staff Association, Latino Faculty Association, and Gay and Lesbian Association of District Employees. An Asian/Pacific Islander Faculty group is in the planning stages. The Diversity Committee highlights a different group each month of the school year and supports a variety of activities and educational opportunities, including brochures available at the library: September, Hispanic Heritage Month; October, Disabilities Awareness Month; November, Muslim Awareness Month; December and January, Kwanzaa Awareness; February, Black History Month; March, Women’s Recognition Month; April, Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Awareness Month; May, “Noche par alas familias Latinos” (6.53). These events are also publicized in the College’s weekly @Cypress newsletter (6.54). In addition, through the District Office of Equity and Diversity, training is required of all College personnel in the areas of Sexual Harassment and Unlawful Discrimination and Hiring Committee Training for equal opportunity for those participating on hiring committees. The Office of Equity and Diversity also monitors programs and activities to ensure compliance with state and federal laws and District policies regarding equal employment, sexual harassment, unlawful discrimination, and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (6.55). Support for employees in need of assistance is provided through the District Office of Human Resource. The Employee Assistance Program helps employees with health and wellness, personal relationships, work relationship, and finances. Resources are also provided to find counselors, lawyers, a certified financial planner, child care provider, eldercare provider, and estate guidance (6.56).

Self Evaluation According to the most recent Campus Climate Survey (6.7), more personnel are satisfied with the College’s programs, practices, and services than in the previous survey. The majority of employees believe that individInstitutional Self Study — Spring 2011

uals have equal opportunities in their careers regardless of their gender, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. Employees self-identified as minorities are less satisfied than those of the majority groups (men, white). Faculty and staff are less satisfied than managers. The results of the survey indicate that the College should focus on improving the experience for employees who are women, non-White, GLBT, or disabled. Also, the College could help staff and faculty (especially part-time faculty) “feel that their opinions and duties are influential, meaningful, and important for the college and our students.”

Planning Agenda None. 4.b. The institution regularly assesses its record in employment equity and diversity consistent with its mission.

Descriptive Summary The District Office of Equity and Diversity is responsible for “monitor[ing] programs and activities” to ensure that they are consistent with the goals of the District. At the College, the Diversity Committee reviews the findings of the semi-annual Campus Climate Surveys to determine if there are areas of concern that need the committee’s attention. Each hiring committee is aware of the need for equity and diversity, and members are trained to meet these requirements. The District Office of Equity and Diversity provides “in-service training for administration, faculty and staff regarding hiring procedures, equal employment opportunity, prevention of unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment in the academic setting/work environment.” The District-wide Equal Employment Opportunity and Diversity Advisory Committee (EEOAC) assists the District in developing and implementing the District Equal Employment Opportunity Plan and helps to formulate and recommend activities to promote diversity, inclusion, and multiculturalism throughout the District, and to promote community relations in the area of diversity. This district-wide committee is comprised of representatives of the various College/site constituent groups (faculty, classified, management, confidential, students, and community members). A Cypress College student, faculty member, 179

classified employee, and management employee serve on the District-wide EEOAC committee as a part of the participatory governance process. In accordance with Cypress Collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Mission Statement, the Diversity Committee is dedicated to fostering diversity among its students, employees, and community by cultivating and promoting inclusiveness, awareness, and acceptance. The Diversity Committee supports the recruitment and retention of diverse faculty, staff, and management. This is accomplished through assistance with diversity-related outreach/recruitment activities, job postings in newspapers, publications, websites, and other social media as it relates to equity and diversity. The District Office of Equity and Diversity works with Cypress College to ensure that all employees who serve on hiring committees are provided with appropriate in-service training regarding the Districtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s hiring policies and procedures, the legal aspects of hiring, and unlawful discrimination in the academic/working environments. The District monitors college hiring, programs and activities to ensure compliance with state and federal laws and District policies as they relate to equal employment opportunity (6.36).

Self Evaluation The Campus Climate Survey 2010 shows that the majority of staff that responded felt that the College is responsive to the issues of diversity and equity (6.7). The Campus Climate Survey reports that 85.9% of respondents feel the campus is equally supportive of all genders. 75.8% feel that women have equal opportunities for recognition, respect, and advancement at the College. 79.8% (72% non-white 84.1% white) feel the campus is equally supportive of all racial/ethnic groups. 56.1% (50% non-white 59.5% white) feel the College is committed to increasing numbers and percentages of ethnic minorities in classified, faculty, and administrative positions. 75.5% feel the campus is equally supportive of all sexual orientations. 43.9% feel the College is committed to supporting diversity activities that address issues relevant to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender employees and students. 74% (63.1% non-white 80% white) feel that diversity is actively promoted on campus.

4.c. The institution subscribes to, advocates, and demonstrates integrity in its treatment of its administration, faculty, staff and students.

Descriptive Summary The NOCCCD Board Policy BP 1002 states:

2.2 Achieving, respecting and embracing diversity within the student body, faculty, and staff will be of primary importance.

2.3 Consistent with state legislation, the District will apply the principles of shared governance, which is a decision-making process that is based on a fundamental belief in the value of all opinions, as well as on an agreement to thoughtfully consider the point of view of all affected constituencies.

These policies are in evidence at the College through the many shared governance committees that exemplify integrity in incorporating the participation and viewpoints of all campus constituents. Among many examples are the Presidentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Advisory Cabinet, the Planning and Budget Committee, the Diversity Committee, and the Program Review Committee.

Self Evaluation The most recent Campus Climate Report shows that the majority of respondents feel that the College does demonstrate integrity in its treatment of its diverse population. There is a strong feeling at the College that each group has a voice and that voice is heard. Policies and procedures at the District and the College demonstrate the fair treatment of faculty and staff. The policies and practices at the College show this fair treatment of all students. Another example of the supportive environment at the College is the frequent honoring of faculty and staff for their contributions to the College. Award luncheons are held each year for faculty and staff. A year-end Luau includes awarding personnel on their time served at the College. At graduation, the honorees are recognized publicly. In all, there is a strong sense throughout the College that work and effort are noticed and honored.

Planning Agenda None. 180

Cypress College

Planning Agenda 5. The institution provides all personnel with appropriate opportunities for continued professional development, consistent with the institution’s mission and based on identified teaching and learning needs.

more effectively to various forces that demand change with the ultimate goal of improving student success. Consequently, the College’s multi-faceted professional development program provides on-campus workshops, semester-long intensive seminars, and funding for offcampus workshops. The framework developed provides for immediate responses to queries and concerns from faculty and staff.

Descriptive Summary

Self Evaluation

None.

Professional development at Cypress College is a collaborative endeavor guided by the College’s Educational Master Plan (EMP) (6.1) and the Student Services Master Plan (6.23). Professional development is operationalized and implemented by the College’s Strategic Plan (6.2) and the District Strategic Plan (6.34) with the overarching purpose of improving staff performance and student success while enhancing the College’s status as a premier learning community. At the center of this effort is the College’s Staff Development Committee, a shared-governance committee comprised of faculty, classified staff, managers, and students. The mission of this committee is to plan and implement professional development activities, collectively known as the Staff Development Program, for all College staff based on the teaching and learning needs identified through a variety of needs assessments, program review and evaluation (6.9), review of current literature on learning-centered instruction, and examination of the College’s institutional research such as the Campus Climate Surveys for students and staff (6.7). The faculty Staff Development Coordinator chairs the Staff Development Committee, coordinates and implements the activities of the Staff Development Program, and serves on numerous committees (Academic Senate, SLO Team, Basic Skills/ ESL Committee, Planning and Budget Committee, District myGateway Steering Committee, and District Staff Development Chairs Committee) in order to share information and collect ideas for future professional development activities. In addition, other departments and programs provide professional and staff development opportunities as well (e.g., Distance Education Coordinator, Academic Computing, Health Center, Emergency Operations Center Advisory Team, and District Information Services). At the heart of this collaborative effort is the philosophy that staff and professional development should enable College faculty and staff to respond Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

The Spring 2007 Campus Support Services Quality Review (CSSQR) for the Staff Development Program satisfaction survey revealed that 93% of respondents rated the overall quality of the service (hours of operation, timeliness of responses, presenter knowledge, quality of materials) as Good/Excellent (6.9). The Spring 2010 CSSQR satisfaction survey found that 89% of respondents rated the overall quality as Good/ Excellent (6.9). Although there was a drop in satisfaction ratings, it must be noted that in May 2008, the 100% Staff Development Administrative Assistant resigned and was not replaced due to budget cuts. Due to this loss of administrative support, the Staff Development Coordinator with 60% reassigned time has had to balance the demands of the Staff Development Office with the coordination of the Staff Development Program.

Planning Agenda None. 5.a. The institution plans professional development activities to meet the needs of its personnel.

Descriptive Summary Every three years through the Campus Support Services Quality Review (CSSQR) (6.9) process, the Staff Development Committee utilizes the CSSQR faculty and staff satisfaction survey, as well as workshop evaluations, to evaluate the past three year’s plan of activities. The Staff Development Committee also conducts an intensive needs assessment every three years before completing the CSSQR. A review of the Educational Master Plan (EMP) (6.1), the College’s Strategic Plan (6.2), and other College planning documents provides the foundation for future Staff Development activities. 181

A search of instructional and student services planning and program review documents and the Campus Climate Survey (6.7) also reveals needs that might otherwise be missed. Once this review of assessed needs has been collected, the committee reviews and revises the program’s mission and administrative unit outcomes, as needed, and writes a new three-year plan of activities, including a list of resources that are needed to carry out the new three-year plan. The Staff Development Committee then uses the results of the CSSQR as justification to request annual operating funds through the One-time Budget Funding process. The committee meets twice a month when classes are in session to develop, implement, and evaluate professional development activities for faculty, classified staff, and managers. The annual plan is a flexible document that allows the committee to respond expeditiously to changing needs. For example, when new technology is adopted by the District or purchased by the College, immediate plans are made to develop training opportunities and materials for faculty, classified staff, and managers (6.24). The Staff Development Program has several components. One is the opportunity for faculty, classified staff, and managers to request workshop and conference funding for off-campus events to meet the critical needs for professional development as determined by campus priorities. The Staff Development Office also produces electronic materials, such as the Classified Resource Book and instructions for using the Early Alert Program, available on the Internet as a resource. In Fall 2010, a “resident expert” program offering oneon-one assistance by knowledgeable staff members will be developed and offered as needed. The Staff Development Program also offers a limited number of single meeting workshops, such as Adjunct Faculty meetings, single-session TechCafe workshops on new instructional technology, myGateway/Webstar and TracDat workshops (6.37). Most professional development activities, however, have been developed to focus on the collaboration of colleagues over an extended period of time to develop new strategies or materials. Participants in these seminars or workshop series may also earn equivalent unit credit toward advancement on the pay scale. Some examples of this type of activity include the following, which are ongoing unless otherwise noted:

182

◊

New Faculty Seminar – year-long program for new tenure-track faculty

◊

New Classified Orientation and Mentoring Program – six-month mentoring program

◊

Learning-Centered Instruction Seminar – year-long program which includes learning/teaching styles, student diversity, student preparedness, classroom management techniques, brain-based research applicable to learning, classroom assessment techniques, reading and writing strategies, and modes of delivery

◊

SLO Writing, Assessment, Analysis and Report Writing Workshop Series – a series designed for faculty to attend and work together as departments developed by the SLO Facilitator and Coordinator

◊

Best Practices in Instruction and Student Services – one-day event with follow-up activities

◊

Learning Communities Development Training – a semester-long program for faculty to produce syllabus and materials for integrated instructional learning community (2004-2008 funded by 20032008 Title V Hispanic Serving Institutions Grant)

◊

Hybrid/Online Training Seminar – intensive semester-long instructional seminar developed by the Instructional Designer (2004-2007)

Other programs and services offer workshops and seminars as well. The Distance Education Coordinator and Instructional Designer are revising the Online Training Program for all faculty. Academic Computing also presents workshops for email system and off-campus access to the campus network (6.39). The Cypress College Health Center initiated a day-long Non-Violent Crisis Intervention Workshops, which is now offered as a district-wide program. The College also provides Emergency Management Training utilizing videos and discussions to prepare faculty and staff, and ultimately students, for disasters such as fire, earthquake, and shooter-on-campus events. In addition to the videos and discussion activities, the College engagCypress College

es in ongoing emergency response drills to be better prepared for unforeseen disasters. These drills are held every semester and include all staff members, students, and various community response organizations. District Information Services presents workshops on the Banner Enterprise System for all of its employees who utilize the system (6.37). District Human Resources facilitates workshops on sexual harassment and discrimination and has sponsored the Hire Me Workshops for prospective full-time faculty, a program developed at Cypress College (6.38).

Self Evaluation As a result of the needs assessment conducted during the CSSQR process in 2004 and 2007, the following workshops, seminars, and other activities have been developed and implemented. The list below reflects the manner in which the need was identified and the activity that was developed to meet that need. This list provides examples of the results of the Staff Development planning process.

◊

Develop and assess instructional and student services student learning outcomes (6.1 and 6.2a and b) ➔ the SLO Assessment, Analysis, and Report Writing Workshop Series

◊

Support and provide for changes in the workplace for all personnel (6.2a) ➔ Classified Resource Book

◊

Purchase and implementation of the District myGateway portal ➔ myGateway Training including web accessibility and course studio implementation

◊

Purchase of the TracDat Assessment Management Software ➔ Development of TracDat Training for faculty

◊

“Need: online workshop registration” (2007 SD Needs Survey) ➔ Development of District-wide Staff Development Registration Calendar

◊

“No recent workshops on first aid” (2007 SD Needs Survey) ➔ District-sponsored First Aid/CPR classes

◊

“Workshops on working with angry and troubled students” (2007 SD Needs Sur-

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

vey) ➔ Nonviolent Crisis Intervention Workshop The Spring 2010 CSSQR Satisfaction Survey found that 89% of respondents rated presenter knowledge of all workshops and seminars as Good/Excellent (6.9).

Planning Agenda None. 5.b. With the assistance of the participants, the institution systematically evaluates professional development programs and uses the results of these evaluations as the basis for improvement.

Descriptive Summary Because of the variables affecting the improvement of teaching and learning, it is difficult to identify and quantify the impact of professional development activities in a statistical way. However, the ASCCC “Guidelines for Implementation of the Flexible Calendar Program” (developed with the Chancellor’s Office) outlines four different levels of evaluation for staff development programs, ranging from basic to advanced in regard to “reaction,” “achievement,” “behavior,” and “impact” (6.33). One mechanism used by the Staff Development Committee that demonstrates “reaction” is to compile selfreported responses and evaluations from faculty and staff to determine if the workshops had an immediate impact. The results of the satisfaction survey component of the CSSQR are examples of this “reaction” type of evaluation (6.40). Whenever possible, Staff Development activities — especially seminars and workshop series — are designed to be evaluated at the “achievement,” “behavior,” and/or “impact level.” More specifically, several workshops used “achievement” as the type of evaluation. A component of the Webpage Development Training is a quiz on web accessibility, which the faculty must pass before starting to build their webpage. At the end of this workshop, instructors demonstrate that that they have attained these skills by developing their faculty homepage. The myGateway Course Studio Training, TracDat Training, First Aid/CPR, and Nonviolent Crisis Intervention Training are all evaluated by the “achievement” of the participants. 183

The evaluation of “behavior” determines if participants have modified their on-the-job behavior and are using the information they learned. The faculty who successfully completed the Hybrid/Online Training developed a hybrid or online class using Blackboard. Since 2007, 223 instructors have attended at least one of the SLO Assessment, Analysis, and Report Writing workshops. As of October 2010, faculty members have defined SLOs for 85% of the courses, defined assessment methods for 82%, and closed the loop on 48% of all the courses. The last type of evaluation identifies whether or not the training had a positive “impact” on the organization including student success or improved morale. For example, participants in the initial Learning Communities Development Program developed the University Transfer Achievement Program (UTAP) learning community whose students achieved higher retention and student success ratings than the freshmen not participating in the program (6.41). Another example of “impact” evaluation was conducted after Student Services SLO workshops. Each November since 2006, the Student Services Council has dedicated their November meeting as their SLO workshop. During the past three years (cycles) of SLO development and evaluation, most of the student services areas have demonstrated positive effects on student learning as measured through the outcomes and objectives established in each of the departments (6.42). The data collected from these four types of evaluations are reviewed during the annual planning meeting and the development of the three-year Staff Development Plan. Every three years since 2004, the Staff Development Committee has completed the Campus Support Services Quality Review (6.9) that now asks the committee members to do the following:

184

◊

Review the mission of the Staff Development Program and determine how well it has achieved its previous three-year goals, including those included in the College’s Strategic Plan (6.2)

◊

Review the results of the faculty and staff satisfaction survey.

◊

Review the results of the current needs assessment.

◊

Write Administrative unit outcomes for the next three years, including those goals related to professional development in the Strategic Plan.

◊

Develop an expenditure plan needed to achieve the goals.

◊

Evaluation of the best funding resource to achieve the goals and Administrative Unit Outcomes, i.e. one-time funding requests, grant proposals, and/or fund raising events

◊

Submit requests for funding based on needs assessment, three-year Staff Development Plan, and the Strategic Plan.

In addition, the Staff Development Committee plans to develop each Staff Development activity and its evaluation to include achievement, behavior, and/or impact types of evaluation.

Self Evaluation The Staff Development Committee has completed the Campus Support Services Quality Review for the past three program review cycles (6.9). The committee has seen a drop in the satisfaction ratings of the overall quality of the Staff Development program as Good/ Excellent from 93% of all respondents in 2007 to 89% of all respondents in Spring 2010. This is most likely the result of the reduction of services due to the loss of the 100% Staff Development Administrative Assistant position in May 2008. Until funding sources are made available, the reduction of services from the Staff Development Office will continue, and adjustments will have to be made. The Staff Development Program is moving from “reaction” evaluations given at the end of workshops to the three higher levels of evaluation. To evaluate the effectiveness of the TracDat workshops, “achievement” was used. Instructors were asked to practice with a training “course” and then input actual SLO assessment data for one of their courses into TracDat. Of the 154 instructors who attended the workshops, 89% inputted actual course data into TracDat during the workshop (6.43). There was a 100% pass rate on the exit test for the 8-hour Non-Violent Crisis Intervention Training Program for 28 Cypress College faculty and staff (6.44). Cypress College

To evaluate the effectiveness of the series of SLO workshops presented over a span of two years, the measure of “behavior” evaluation was used: “Are participants using the information they learned to assess SLOs?” Although faculty members worked on just one course in each of the workshops, the end result was that 223 academic instructors who attended at least one of the SLO Assessment, Analysis, and Report Writing workshops have written SLO assessment plans for 82% of all courses and closed the SLO loop on 48% of the courses (6.45). The University Transfer Achievement Program (UTAP) is an example of the “impact” of the semesterlong Title V Learning Communities Training Program and the persistence of the lead instructor of the UTAP program. During 2007-2008, the UTAP successful course completion rates for UTAP courses were considerably higher than the successful course completion rate for all non-UTAP courses: English 60 – 90% to 60%; English 100 – 81.8% to 57%; Counseling 150 – 94% to 71.1%; and Psychology 101 – 84.8% to 60.5% (6.41). When planning Staff Development activities, the Staff Development Committee encourages the development of activities that can be evaluated by “achievement,” “behavior,” or “impact,” as defined by the ASCCC Guidelines for Implementation of the Flex Calendar Program. Whenever possible, the Staff Development Committee recommends the use of these more advanced types of evaluations when Staff Development activities are being planned and developed.

Planning Agenda None. 6. Human resource planning is integrated with institutional planning. The institution systematically assesses the effective use of human resources and uses the results of the evaluation as the basis for improvement.

Descriptive Summary The Cypress College Educational Master Plan (6.1) directs institutional planning and the development of the Cypress College Strategic Plan (6.2). The Educational Master Plan was written in September 2006 for the period 2006-2016. The current Strategic Plan was Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

written for the period 2008-2011. The College’s goal is to more fully integrate its planning processes with the District’s Master Plan that is currently being updated (6.13). In addition, the College has several annual review processes in keeping with its core values of excellence and collegiality and commitment to the shared-governance process. Review processes include: Department Planning and Program Review, (6.3) Student Services Quality Review (6.4), Campus Support Services Quality Review (6.9), and Special Programs Quality Review, (6.10) all of which are completed every three years. These reviews evaluate the effectiveness of each department or program and identify human resource needs to meet identified goals and objectives.

Self Evaluation The College has excellent procedures in place to ensure that human resource planning is integrated with institutional planning. All of the entities on campus (CSEA, full-time faculty, and management) look to the Educational Master Plan and Strategic Plan as the basis for the goals and objectives established by departments, programs, and divisions. This process also helps the Planning and Budget Committee ensure that its decision-making processes meet the goals and objectives specified in the Educational Master Plan and Strategic Plan. Deans, directors, managers, and the Academic Senate each have monthly meetings, and CSEA constituents meet regularly. This allows all constituencies to evaluate and make recommendations for institutional planning, the effective use of human resources, growth and development, and improvement. Every two to three years a Classified Needs Survey (6.11) is conducted to determine Classified Staffing Needs at the College. In March 2010, all Cypress College managers and three Academic Senate representatives participated in a Classified Needs Assessment Prioritization (6.12) to determine the most critical classified positions to fill for 2010-2011 based on the available funds. This process was necessary due to retirements, vacancies, and positions that could be terminated due to the reduction in categorical program funding. Also, the campus annually conducts a full-time faculty hiring assessment using the Full-time Faculty Hiring 185

Request form (6.8). The form asks how the position request relates to needs stated in the most recent Educational Master Plan and Department Planning and Program Review. Each division dean consults with the full-time faculty regarding the tenure-track positions that should be requested, and a request for a position(s) is submitted to the Executive Vice President. The requests are then ranked by a committee comprised of the deans and Academic Senate representatives, and a recommendation to hire positions in the ranked order is submitted to PAC and the President for review and a final decision. The number of positions that may actually be filled for the next year is determined by the District. The District and College have systems in place to ensure that all performance evaluations are conducted and meet requirements. For full-time faculty, the Executive Vice President’s Office sends out a list of evaluations that are due and checks to make sure that they have been completed. Deans and Human Resources audit required evaluations for adjunct faculty and classified employees. In addition, District Human Resources also provides training for managers to ensure that proper procedures are being followed. Although a process for filling vacancies exists for CSEA and full-time faculty positions, currently, no similar process exists for management positions. In 2009, a committee was formed to review the management evaluation form and change it to be similar to the process used for full-time and classified employees (6.22). Discussion is currently taking place with District Human Resources on whether the annual management evaluation will be changed to more closely follow the two- or three-year evaluation schedules held for classified and faculty, respectively.

Planning Agenda None.

6.3 Department Planning and Program Reviews for 2006-2007 and 2008-2009 — www.cypresscollege. edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ProgramReview 6.4 Student Support Services Quality Review http:// www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ProgramReview 6.5 NOCCCD Board Policies, Administrative Procedures and Administrative Guide — www.nocccd.edu/Policies/PoliciesAndProcedures.htm 6.6 Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory 2007 — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rsurveys.aspx 6.7 Campus Climate Surveys — www.cypresscollege. edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rsurveys.aspx 6.8

6.9 Campus Support Services Quality Review — www. cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ProgramReview 6.10 Special Programs Quality Review — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ProgramReview 6.11

Classified Needs Survey

6.12

Classified Needs Assessment Prioritization

6.13

District Master Plan Timeline

6.14 Institutional Effectiveness Report — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rreports. aspx 6.15 United Faculty Collective Bargaining Agreement, July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2011 6.16 Board Agenda/Minutes June 24, 2003 — www. nocccd.edu/Trustees/MtgMinutesArchive2010.htm 6.17

Dr. Bob Simpson email, November 16, 2009

6.18

Nina DeMarkey email, November 12, 2009

6.19 Adjunct Faculty United Agreement, July 1 – July 30, 2012 6.20

Reference Documents 6.1 Cypress College Educational Master Plan, 20062016 — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 6.2 Cypress College Strategic Plan, 2008-2011 — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx

186

Full-time Faculty Hiring Request Form

CSEA Agreement, August 1, 2007 – July 31, 1010

6.21 California Community College Chancellor’s Office June 2005 Report from the “Workgroup on 75/25 Issues” 6.22 Email from Jorge Gamboa regarding Management Evaluation Revision Committee, December 16, 2009 6.23 Student Services Master Plan — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments. aspx

Cypress College

6.24 Staff Development Committee Minutes – J:\Staff Development 6.25 United Faculty Probationary Tenure Track Evaluation Form — J:\District Forms and Templates 6.26 United Faculty Tenure Track Evaluation Form — J:\ District Forms and Templates 6.27 Classified Evaluation Forms, Probationary and Permanent — J:\District Forms and Templates

6.47

Steve Duncan email 9-27-10

6.48

Jeff Horsley email 9-28-10

6.49

Faculty Evaluation Schedule

6.50 Distance Education Plan — www.cypresscollege. edu/IRP/Resources/Planning/CC_DE_Plan_Final_040209.pdf

6.28 Management Evaluation Form — J:\District Forms and Templates 6.29 Focused Mid-Term Report, 2008 (p. 29) — www. cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/Accreditation/areports.aspx 6.30

Guide to Evaluating Institutions, August 2009 (p.7-8)

6.31 @Cypress — www.cypresscollege.edu/newsEvents/ news/atcypress.aspx 6.32 Student Services SLO Final Reports 2007, 2008, 2009 — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/SLO 6.33 Guidelines for Implementation of the Flexible Calendar Program — www.cccco.edu/Portals/4/AA/Flexible%20Calendar/Flex_Calendar_Guidelines_04-07. docx.pdf 6.34 District Strategic Plan — www.nocccd.edu/StrategicPlanning/StrategicPlan.htm 6.35 Cypress College Catalog — www.cypresscollege. edu/academics/CollegeCatalog.aspx 6.36 Email from Ken Robinson, District Director of Equity & Diversity, November 24, 2010 6.37

MyGateway — Staff Development Calendar

6.38

HireMe Workshops Report 2007 & 2008

6.39

Web Editor Training email announcements

6.40

Fall 2009 Opening Day Evaluation Summary

6.41 UTAP Course Completion Report Fall-2004-Spring 2008). 6.42

CCRAA STEM Grant Proposal, 2008-2010

6.43

TracDat Workshop Report, 2009-2010

6.44

Non-Violent Crisis Intervention Training Report, 2010

6.45

SLO Workshop Participation, April 2009

6.46 Email from Vice Chancellor of Human Rsources, August 23, 2010

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

187

Standard IIIB: Physical Resources Cypress College is recognized for the quality and vitality of its physical resources, including its major facilities, architectural themes, and landscaping strategies. The integrity of the physical environment is assured by the dedication of human and financial resources to the continuous planning, construction, and maintenance cycles necessary for the provision of resources conducive to a sound educational environment. The College is a part of community-wide participation and involvement programs to assist in evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of its Emergency Action Plan. The College is committed to maintaining a positive status with respect to its physical resources even during challenging economic times. It takes all necessary measures to assure a safe, secure, and supportive learning environment, with physical resources appropriately conceived, built, and maintained for the disciplines they support. Physical resources, which include facilities, equipment, land, and other assets, support student learning programs and services and improve institutional effectiveness. Physical resource planning is integrated with institutional planning. 1. The institution provides safe and sufficient physical resources that support and assure the integrity and quality of its programs and services, regardless of location or means of delivery.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College has engaged in significant construction, including new and remodeled facilities, over the course of the last six years. This construction has occurred utilizing a combination of District and local bond funding. The new and newly remodeled facilities have positioned the College to assure the integrity and the quality of its programs and services. In order to assure continuing standards of integrity with respect to its facilities, the College collaborates on a regular basis with District personnel to review facilities issues. Alliance of Schools for Cooperative Insurance Programs (ASCIP), state agencies, and legal directives require the campus to monitor and evaluate facility and campus safety according to required codes and regulations 188

and, therefore, provide the main criteria and processes against which the College evaluates its facilitiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; safety. State agencies include the Air Quality Management District (AQMD) (7.4), the Health Department (7.24), the local Fire Authority (7.20), the Department of State Architecture (DSA) (7.15), and OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) (7.34). Legal directives include the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (7.1). Custodial, maintenance, and campus safety staff conduct daily inspections of facilities under their charges. Physical Plant personnel are alerted when deans, office personnel, faculty, or students encounter potential safety hazards. In addition, the Campus Safety Committee (7.39) meets every month to review the College status with respect to the various District, state, and federal safety programs and any other related issues. Throughout the year, on a rotating basis, the Physical Plant Director and the Manager of Maintenance and Operations (M&O) survey the buildings and grounds. Unsafe conditions or potential hazards are addressed immediately. The Emergency Action Plan (7.17) is overseen by the Vice President of Administrative Services, but is facilitated by Campus Safety. The campus participates in mandated emergency drills (7.18) every semester, during which the campus administration team sets up the Incident Command Post (7.26) in accord with state and federal emergency response protocols with identified key personnel serving in their designated roles. The College coordinates communication plans with the District and local agencies for mutual emergency response aid. The campus has also been designated as a potential evacuation site for the Red Cross and a Point of Dispensing (POD) for vaccines for the local Health Department. The Director of the Physical Plant and the Campus Safety Director, along with other campus administrators, are able to identify through these drills the strengths and weaknesses of the Collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s current emergency response plan. The institution continues to learn and improve from these exercises. The District also conducts campus facilities inspections (7.12) and offers suggestions and advice. The District complies with the requirements of the mandated Injury and Illness Prevention Program (7.28) for ensuring the safety of all employees and students. The District conducts a safety audit (7.38) of its facilities every three Cypress College

years. These loss prevention and safety audits (7.38) are driven by the insurance carrier, Alliance of Schools for Cooperative Insurance Programs (ASCIP). Participants in this review are the Physical Plant Director or Manager of Maintenance and Operations, the District Environmental Health and Safety Specialist, and a representative from the Alliance of Schools for Cooperative Insurance Program. The District insurance carrier also requires additional inspections as mandated by the Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP) (7.28). Currently, the District’s Environmental Health and Safety Specialist conducts unofficial periodic evaluations of the campus with either the Physical Plant Director or the Manager of Maintenance and Operations. The State Space Inventory System (7.41) is updated by the campus every Fall to provide for an accurate accounting of current availability and use of its classrooms, lecture halls, laboratories, and other facilities. Classroom use continues to be monitored and included in the Annual Fall Report (7.4) created by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning. The availability and quality of lecture and lab spaces continue to be of particular concern, especially in older buildings such as the Science, Engineering & Math building. The campus pays close attention to the annual Spring Space Utilization Report (7.42). This report contains data conducive to the monitoring of scheduled usage, indicating the sufficiency or deficiency of space, and availability of classrooms, lecture halls, labs, and other facilities. The College continues to monitor the ability of its facilities to meet the instructional needs of the campus. This topic is often evaluated in relation to the Education Master Plan, the Facilities Master Plan (7.19), the Strategic Plan (7.43), the Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory (7.32), the Campus Climate Survey (7.6), the Planning and Budget Committee (7.35), the Campus Support Services Quality Review (7.8) Quality Review (7.8), and the campus Safety Committee (7.39). The Program Review Guidelines (7.37) and the Campus Support Services Quality Review (7.8) are processes that focus on department-specific needs. The College also continues to employ the services of a consultant who reviews and makes recommendations that help the campus meet and achieve space utilization goals (7.42). Safe and adequate physical resources are available Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

campus wide to ensure that the needs of programs and services are met regardless of locality or means of delivery. The primary criteria used by the campus to assess the safety of its facilities are the codes and regulations of the various state agencies, including the Fire Authority (7.20), Health Department (7.24), Air Quality Management District (7.4), Occupational Safety and Health Administration (7.34), and American Disabilities Act (7.1). The institution remains in compliance with the codes and regulatory requirements of the state agencies. The Fire Authority conducted its most recent inspection of the campus April 7, 2010 (7.20). The Health Department conducted its annual inspection of the campus December 3, 2009 (7.24). There were no violations. For its off-site programs, the Health Sciences Department uses the Agreement for Clinical Programs in Health Science for each facility (7.2). This contract was drawn up by legal counsel and executed by the Manager of District Resources, as well as the Vice Chancellor, Finance and Facilities. The Physical Education Department also offers offsite programs. However, for these programs there is no campus process in place to evaluate the safety and quality of the sites. These facilities are typically businesses that the general public uses, such as a golf course or a bowling alley. These off-site facilities must meet and comply with state and city codes and regulations, as well as criteria set by insurers. These public businesses are regulated by the same agencies as the institution, such as the Fire Authority and Health Department. Since 2003, the Cypress College Career Technical Education Division’s Hotel, Restaurant, Culinary Arts classes (HRC) have been held at the NOCCCD Anaheim Campus. This move has resulted in significant improvements in the quality of the educational experience and student success. The larger Anaheim Campus location with state-of-the-art kitchen equipment and learning facility allows for cutting-edge culinary techniques and hospitality instruction. The larger facility and classroom space has also allowed for additional sections and class offerings resulting in double the enrollments. Additionally, the Anaheim Campus proximity to the Anaheim Resort District benefits area employers and HRC students with employment and internship opportunities, industry guest speakers, hotel field trips, and networking opportunities. 189

The individual programs evaluate the safety and sufficiency of the facilities and the equipment they use on an ongoing basis. The College uses the results of these evaluations to determine unmet needs for maintenance, improvements, purchases, upgrades, and replacement of equipment. The unmet needs are prioritized and resolved mainly through the One Time Funding process (7.33).

the classrooms. This work was completed during Summer 2010. In the face of limited finances, the College has engaged in a process of prioritization to assure the provision of facilities support necessary for the maintenance of quality in its programs. The institution remains in compliance with the codes and regulations of the state agencies even during these difficult economic times.

The Collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Maintenance and Operations Department works with the offices of Academic Computing and the Distance Education Program to assure that distance delivery modes are well-supported for faculty and students. For example, if a television requires mounting, or fiber optic needs to be pulled, the Physical Plant responds and quickly provides required assistance. The Technology Plan was prepared by the Campus Technology Committee (7.45) and Academic Computing in order to provide a framework of support conducive to the maintenance of sound instruction. The plan addresses Distance Education infrastructure, hardware, and software support for faculty, staff, and students. Computer equipment is on a regular rotation schedule for replacement (7.11). Updated equipment is purchased regularly to replace the old or obsolete computer systems.

The Director of Disabled Students Program and Services (DSPS) affirmed that the campus strives to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (7.1). Two examples were cited of how M&O interfaces with DSPS to assure accessibility. First, during the comprehensive remodel of the Humanities Building, accessible features such as automatic doors and accessible counter space were factored into the building plans. Second, the campus Master Plan included specifications that would assure physical access such as larger elevators, curb cuts, wider sidewalks, and automatic doors (7.7).

Self Evaluation Facilities and construction updates are shared monthly with the campus Management Team (7.31). Faculty and staff surveys indicate that they are not always fully informed and aware of any upcoming improvements or changes that would help benefit the campus. This information is made available at all Management Team meetings (7.31). The expectation is that managers will share in a timely manner the information that is provided at these meetings. The campus community is aware that funding sources are more limited than in past years. The Fine Arts and Science, Engineering & Math buildings were taken off the initial list of priorities during the funded renovations since they were next in line for State Capital Outlay Funding (7.5, 7.48). These projects are still on the State approval list; however, the funding may be a few more years away given the current state of the economy. Local Capital Outlay Funds were identified to replace the carpet and paint in the public areas of these buildings and to address other critical needs in 190

According to the 2009 Space Inventory (7.41), the campus is 59.0 % efficient per the State Utilization Formula in the use of its facilities. The reduction in course offerings has increased the fill rate to approximately 102%. Enrollment is up and parking has been impacted for the first time in many years. Now that the Humanities building remodel has been completed, the campus has several vacant (inactive) classrooms that could negatively impact its Space Inventory (7.41) and the potential Capital Outlay Funding (7.48) for the Fine Arts and the Science, Engineering & Math building. The removal of the old temporary buildings is now a College priority. The elimination of buildings in this space would open an opportunity for the campus to expand parking and meet the needs of growing enrollment. A Centralized Scheduling Program (7.9) is in place and working for the improved coordination of facilities assignments. The system has many capabilities that could benefit the entire campus; however, the program is not yet fully implemented. It is a very strong tool used by the Facilities Office to address scheduling needs for inside requests and outside rentals. Once fully implemented, it will assist the campus in locating and booking rooms that are made available to staff. It will also allow staff to view real-time information on events and activities taking place on and off campus. The expressed needs of the College often come into Cypress College

conflict with State formulas and guidelines regarding space utilization (7.42). The educational programs and divisions, in general, perceive a need for more space. However, the educational plans for most programs and divisions do not always validate this perception. College governance mechanisms facilitate the process to evaluate requests for program expansion and facilities needs. Through the use of these tools, the institution assesses and ensures that its facilities meet the needs of their programs and services, and that the facilities are also being used effectively.

port for distance learning demands.

The institution addresses facilities issues in a regular and timely manner. The criteria used by the institution to verify the safety and sufficiency of the off-campus facilities are established in state codes and regulations as previously indicated. However, different off-site facilities (e.g., hospitals) are under different jurisdictions and regulations that are frequently more stringent and far exceed those used by an educational facility. Some programs, such as those offered by Health Science, have an accrediting process that ensures the off-site facilities are safe and sufficient. Other programs, such as Physical Education, may need to develop a process to better document and ensure that the off-site facilities they use are safe and in good condition.

Descriptive Summary

Facilities needs are promptly addressed within the existing College trouble ticket process. Special attention and priority is always given to any potential safety hazards. The Planning and Budget process for One Time Funding (7.33) provides the allocation of funds for equipment replacement and other facilities and infrastructure needs. The Planning and Budget Committee has seen the number of requests submitted annually by each budget unit reduce significantly over the past several years. This is evidence that the needs of the various departments are being met. The campus infrastructure and technology offer significant support to the needs of the distance education delivery modes. Computer equipment and systems in general are systematically updated or replaced. Most of the classrooms and labs have been equipped with state-of-the-art technology that followed the standards set by the Technology Plan (7.46), i.e., ceiling mounted projectors, sound systems, DVD, VCR, document readers, and wireless technology. The College has adopted and implemented a Technology Plan that will better coordinate and administer the provision of supInstitutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Planning Agenda None. 1.a. The institution plans, builds, maintains, and upgrades or replaces its physical resources in a manner that assures effective utilization and the continuing quality necessary to support its programs and services.

The institution’s Educational Master Plan (7.16) establishes the framework for evaluating the facilities needs of programs and services. The collaborative process used by the campus ensures representation from all constituencies at various levels, with appropriately established standards in place to help the design team generally meet and address all relevant issues (7.14). The classrooms in the newly remodeled Humanities building now have state-of-the-art technology, such as “smart classrooms,” lighting controls, sound barriers between classrooms, appropriate furniture, power, data, and wireless standards, and new heating and air conditioning system and controls. The design, installation, and support needs for the new technology had to be addressed during the remodel project. The inclusion of additional classroom space, however, was not possible in this project. The state funding constraints restricted such expansion and growth based on the current Space Inventory Report (7.41). The process for determining equipment needs, replacement, and ongoing maintenance begin with an individual department request. This request may result from the need to introduce new technology due to safety issues or because the equipment has been deemed obsolete or in need of replacement. The division initially evaluates all maintenance, technology, and work-order requests. Those that can be handled within existing division budgets are resolved immediately. Those that present an immediate impact to instruction and for which there are no available funds result in an Emergency /Special request for funding submitted to Planning and Budget (7.35, 7.50) for consideration by all committee members. Those items deemed critical are recommended for funding to the President’s Advisory Cabinet.

191

Some programs evaluate the effectiveness of facilities and equipment in meeting the needs of their specific program through an advisory board that involves individuals from business, industry, education, and government. Each program meets with its advisory group at least once annually, and several meet more frequently for this purpose. Managers, faculty, and staff participate in regional and statewide committees where they discuss and evaluate emerging technologies and instructional delivery models. Conferences and trade shows also introduce them to new technologies. Through this process, the institution evaluates its current status and needs, and determines if changes are warranted. Whenever possible, the necessary changes are implemented in a timeframe and in such a manner as to provide faculty and students with the appropriate facilities and equipment required for their programs. The College assures that physical resources at all locations where instruction is offered, including the programs and services, are constructed and maintained to assure access, safety, security, and a healthy learning and working environment. All programs and departments are suitably built for the discipline they house. Curricular changes can occur at a much faster rate than the State Capital Outlay Funding process (7.48) can accommodate. In these situations, the campus utilizes local funds or grants to facilitate the growth or facilities changes necessary for the effective delivery of instruction. For example, the procurement of computers for instruction came to the institution many years prior to the State funding that supported the Telecommunication Infrastructure Requirements (7.47). During that time, the campus built independent computer labs to support these instructional needs. Today, with the development and implementation of the Educational Master Plan (7.16), the Five-Year Construction Plan (7.21), and the Strategic Plan (7.43), the institution is better prepared to effectively support the existing programs and potential curricular changes of its educational programs.

Self Evaluation The College has developed a well-defined and aggressive internal program of facilities maintenance that takes into account its planning documents, program needs, maintenance cycles, and unexpected emergency requests. The recent acquisition of facilities scheduling software, the adoption of a Distance Education and 192

Technology Plan, and the use of well-defined College processes for the procurement of needed support contribute significantly to the College’s reputation for putting students and instruction first. Regular equipment maintenance is performed mostly by specialized vendors through agreements and contracts that are issued annually for the various departments and divisions. For example, the automotive programs have repair accounts in place to service their instructional equipment. These accounts are funded by the campus to ensure the equipment needs of instructional programs are met. Equipment replacement is funded by the programs out of their individual budgets or through the One Time Funding process (7.33) of the College’s Planning and Budget Committee. In addition to the regular processes established by the College to address internally its facilities and maintenance needs, representatives of the College — including the President and the Vice President of Administrative Services — meet on a regular basis with District personnel, primarily from the Office of Finance and Facilities. These regular meetings provide the opportunity for the College to share information related to facilities issues and to advocate the College’s position with respect to infrastructure and support needs. Facilities issues are addressed at weekly construction meetings, Chancellor’s Staff meetings, and regular District Planning Council meetings.

Planning Agenda None. 1.b. The institution assures that physical resources at all locations where it offers courses, programs, and services are constructed and maintained to assure access, safety, security, and a healthful learning and working environment.

Descriptive Summary The institution assures that all facilities are safe and accessible. Daily facilities and equipment inspections are conducted by Maintenance, Campus Safety, Facilities, and Operations staff. The faculty and division office employees also monitor and inspect their areas and report any unsafe or access-related issues to the Physical Plant office. Additionally, safety and access concerns Cypress College

are discussed at the monthly Safety Committee meetings (7.39). All concerns and potential hazards are immediately addressed by the Physical Plant Office.

regular basis, taking utilization and other relevant data into account.

Some programs, such as those offered by the Health Science Division, undergo periodic accreditation. A significant component of the accreditation process is a thorough evaluation of off-site facilities used by these programs.

Descriptive Summary

Self Evaluation According to the latest Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Survey (7.32), students rated College facilities quite highly and reported that the campus is generally accessible and safe. The institution responds expediently and diligently to any potential hazard or access issue. Assurance that the College’s physical resources are constructed and maintained with the highest standards of access, safety, security, and a healthful learning and working environment are provided by the engagement of effective College and District procedures dedicated to this task. A variety of College committees, including the Safety Committee, Planning and Budget, the President’s Advisory Cabinet, and the Food Service Committee are all engaged in continuous review of the College’s physical resource status. When issues are identified, the College effectively engages its governance processes to assure response in an appropriate timeframe. The College offers a limited number of instructional opportunities at off-campus sites that are not under the charge of accrediting or other educational oversight bodies. There are currently no procedures in place to document, control, and validate that the off-site facilities adhere to appropriate educational facilities access, safety, and security standards. Though the institution does not have control over the off-site facilities that are not District owned, it can engage in a process of verification regarding adherence to state and federal standards.

Planning Agenda None. 2. To assure the feasibility and effectiveness of physical resources in supporting institutional programs and services, the institution plans and evaluates its facilities and equipment on a Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Each fall, an Annual Space Inventory is conducted to determine the adequacy of room utilization (7.41). Throughout the year, classroom use is tracked through the Office of Institutional Research and Planning. To facilitate optimum utilization of space, the campus has begun to implement centralized scheduling (7.9). As a result, course curriculum requirements are more easily matched with the best possible classroom configurations. In addition, Program Reviews often trigger impromptu assessment and modifications of existing facilities several times a year (7.37). Some of the results of these assessments are used to plan and improve or replace facilities and equipment by way of the Planning and Budget Process (7.35). The College also submits an annual Scheduled Maintenance Plan (7.40) to the District, requesting State matched funding for projects that far exceed the campus maintenance budget. However, due to growing budget deficits not only in California, but across the nation, no scheduled maintenance dollars have been received from the State in the past two years. The College’s Five-Year Construction Plan was submitted for 2010-2015 (7.21). This plan included an Initial Project Proposal (IPP) for Tech Ed I (7.29) and an FPP Final Project Proposal for Fine Arts (7.22) and Science, Engineering & Math (7.23). The Fine Arts building is on the approval list of projects pending passage of a State bond (7.5) for Capital Outlay Funding (7.48). Due to the existing economic conditions, expecting passage of a new Bond (7.5) is not realistic this year. With the exception of the Fine Arts and Science, Engineering & Math, most buildings were remodeled with the Measure X Bond (7.5) funds: Tech Ed 1, Tech Ed 2, Tech Ed 3, Business, Theater Gym 2, and Humanities. The College was able to carpet and paint the Science, Engineering & Math and Fine Arts buildings in Summer 2010 using other local Capital Outlay Funds (7.48). This helped to give these buildings a facelift while State Funds to totally renovate these facilities continue to be on hold.

Self Evaluation The existing process is designed and applied to effec193

tively manage the available spaces. Curriculum changes sometimes trigger room changes, modifications, or upgrades. For example, a drafting lab in the SEM building was converted into a multi-purpose lab with the integration of computer stations and data infrastructure. This was done with the use of STEM grant funding, which was awarded for this purpose. Also, as space is available, sections are moved to different classrooms to allow for the right size space to be used. For example, in the Business building, the seat count for a CIS course was restricted because of the room size. To accommodate growth in the seat count, the room was traded for an “inactive” space on campus. The previous “too small” room was deactivated. Space inventory reports are prepared and filed annually each Fall. This exercise allows for the annual evaluation of improvements in space utilization, which can also lead to qualifying for additional State Capital Outlay funding for future renovation projects.

Planning Agenda None. 2.a. Long-range capital plans support institutional improvement goals and reflect projections of the total cost of ownership of new facilities and equipment.

Descriptive Summary The Educational Master Plan (7.16), Facilities Master Plan (7.19), and the Strategic Plan (7.43) all feed into and inform the District Five-Year Construction Plan (7.21). Some smaller projects are funded by the campus through the Planning and Budget process (7.35). A recent example would be the new carpet and paint in the office area of the Science, Engineering & Math building. Elements that comprise “total cost of ownership” include product quality and durability for maximum life expectancy. The campus has developed a list of standards to help ensure that inferior substitutes are not utilized (7.14). Also, organizations such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (7.49), the Air Quality Management District (AQMD) (7.4), and Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) (7.30) set guidelines and codes that must be complied with. The campus’s ability to maintain facilities and equipment versus the cost of a maintenance contract is taken into 194

consideration as well. Capital Projects are prioritized based on criteria that support short- and long-term planning by the institution. These criteria are set by the Educational Master Plan (7.16), Space Inventory Data (7.41), Student Enrollment Capacity Load Ratios (7.44), building conditions, and District matching funds. Long-term planning has already allowed for various modernization and facilities upgrade projects, including the Capital Outlay Funding (7.48) of the new Library/Learning Resource Center (L/LRC) and the Humanities Building remodel for efficiency. Next in the queue are Final Project Proposals for the Fine Arts Building (7.22) and Science, Engineering & Math building (7.23) remodels for efficiency.

Self Evaluation The existing plans and procedures are effectively supporting the facilities improvements. The needs will always exceed the funds, and this is where the planning process helps. The campus has recently completed several new construction projects that were designed by several different architectural and engineering firms. Although the College established standards (7.14) as the initial projects were started, these different firms did not always follow them. For example, the Telecommunication Standard, which can be found in the District Standards, (7.14) was not followed, and soon after the staff moved in, there were needs for additional phone and data lines that would have been in place if the set standards (7.14) had been followed. The College had to absorb most of the cost using its operation’s budget. The most significant impact was on the time and material it took to get the work completed after the walls and ceiling had been closed. What could have cost $3,000 in material to add what was required by the District Standards cost five times that amount. The maintenance staff and budgets were negatively impacted. Many of the campus divisions and departments suffered the consequences with diminished and delayed services that the Maintenance and Operations Department was able to provide during that time. To date, the College is still experiencing difficulties in meeting certain requests. For example, the Student Center originally had an office that was set up for one Cypress College

staff member. Because the Telecommunication Standards were not followed, there are not enough data and phone jacks on the walls to support two work stations. Work will need to be done to pull new wires through the wall and ceiling across the building in order to provide the lines requested for the second work station. The cost associated with this request will need to be funded from the College’s general fund. Due to the lengthy approval process for Capital Outlay Funding (7.48), a project’s needs may change from its original scope of needs. It is difficult to change the scope of work on a state funded project after the Final Project Proposal has been submitted. Any change in scope could jeopardize approved funding. Because of this fact, the College endeavors to submit construction concepts that are well thought out and in accord with identified need, understanding that as time passes from the date of plan development to the date of project completion, the fit of the project with College needs may be compromised to a greater or lesser degree.

Planning Agenda None. 2.b. Physical resource planning is integrated with institutional planning. The institution systematically assesses the effective use of physical resources and uses the results of the evaluation as the basis for improvement.

Descriptive Summary All allocations for facilities modification and expansion, including general upkeep and major repairs, are processed through the College Planning and Budget Committee (7.35). The committee relies upon approved College planning documents to determine the appropriateness of requests for facilities funding support submitted by the various College programs. The committee assesses, evaluates, and recommends funding for the submitted projects to the President’s Advisory Cabinet for those projects deemed appropriate and in accord with established plans. The agenda for planned and approved facilities improvements derives from this process.

great autonomy with respect to internal budgets, including local cash allocations and grant funding, they are expected to act in accord with established planning agendas and to obtain appropriate authorizations prior to proceeding with significant expenditures.

Self Evaluation The existing process allows the institution to allocate funds to meet the needs that support the College’s established plans and goals in an effective and timely manner. The collaborative participation of various constituencies in the process, and their individual participation, allows for the list of funded priorities to be developed and approved at the different levels, e.g., departmental, divisional, Planning and Budget (7.35), Management Team (7.31), the President’s Staff, and President’s Advisory Cabinet (7.36). Data and comments returned every other year from the Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) Survey (7.32) and the Classified Needs Assessment Survey (7.10) help the campus to prioritize allocation of physical resources. Strengths cited as areas of high importance and satisfaction in the 2009 SSI (7.32) included that, on the whole, the campus is well-maintained, is safe and secure for all students, and is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Two ongoing areas of low satisfaction were cited as being substandard restroom sanitary conditions and inadequate parking space (7.32). After in-depth surveys of use conducted by Maintenance and Facilities staff in collaboration with the College’s Campus Safety Department, the parking issue was substantially addressed via a regularlyapproved funding proposal to significantly improve, expand, and reallocate student and staff parking spaces. This reallocation should significantly address concerns over parking expressed in the Campus Climate Survey. The institution does the best it can with available resources. Students are served and faculty and staff are provided with the tools and equipment needed to perform their jobs.

Planning Agenda None.

College divisions and programs have great latitude in utilizing internal funding sources to address identified physical resource needs. Though the programs have Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

195

Reference Documents

7.28

Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP)

7.1

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

7.29

Initial Project Proposal (IPP) for Tech I

7.2

Agreement for Clinical Programs in Health Science

7.30 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)

7.3 Annual Fall Report — Institutional Research and Planning — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rreports.aspx 7.4

Air Quality Management District (AQMD)

7.5

Bond and Remodel for Efficiency Projects List

7.6 Campus Climate Survey — www.cypresscollege. edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rsurveys.aspx 7.7 Campus Master Plan — www.cypresscollege.edu/ about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 7.8 Campus Support Services Quality Review — www. cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ProgramReview

7.31

Management Team Meeting information

7.32 Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory — www. cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ rsurveys.aspx 7.33 One-time Funding Process — documents and priority list — J:\Planning & Budget Committee 7.34 Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) 7.35 Planning & Budget Committee information — J:\ Planning & Budget Committee 7.36 President’s Advisory Cabinet — J:\President’s Advisory Cabinet

7.9

Centralized Scheduling Samples

7.10

Classified Needs Assessment Survey

7.37 Program Review guidelines — J:\Program Review and Department Planning

7.11

Computer Replacement rotation schedule

7.38

Safety Audits

7.12

District Inspections and Evaluations Records

7.39

Safety Committee meeting minutes

7.13

District Purchasing Handbook

7.40

Scheduled Maintenance Plan

7.14

District Standards

7.41

Space Inventory Report

7.15

Department of State Architecture (DSA)

7.42

Space Utilization Report

7.16 Educational Master Plan — www.cypresscollege. edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 7.17

Emergency Action Plan

7.18

Emergency Drills

7.19

Facilities Master Plan

7.20

Fire Authority Inspections

7.21

Five-Year Construction Plan

7.22

Final Project Proposal (FPP) for Fine Arts

7.23

Final Project Proposal (FPP) for Science/Math

7.24

Health Department Inspections

7.25

Health Science Accreditation Document

7.26

Incident Command Post

7.43 Strategic Plan, 2008 - 2011 — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments. aspx 7.44

Student Enrollment Capacity Load Ratios

7.45 Technology Committee information — J:\Campus Technology Committee 7.46 Technology Plan — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/ InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 7.47

Telecommunication Infrastructure Requirements

7.48

Capital Outlay Funding

7.49

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

7.50 Emergency Funding Request — J:\Planning & Budget Committee

7.27 Institutional Effectiveness Report — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rreports. aspx

196

Cypress College

Standard IIIC: Technology Resources Technology resources are used to support student learning programs and services and to improve institutional effectiveness. Technology planning is integrated with institutional planning. 1. The institution assures that any technology support it provides is designed to meet the needs of learning, teaching, college-wide communications, research, and operational systems.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College recognizes the importance of instructional and operational technology in the success of the educational mission of the College. Technology planning is purposefully integrated with Cypress College institutional planning in order to enable and encourage a wide and varied use of technology to support student learning programs and services as well as to improve institutional effectiveness. Technology is integrated through all five of the College’s Strategic Plan directions (8.3). Technology planning serves as a guide for the day-today operations, educational mission, and strategic initiatives of the College and is a key component in creating a dynamic environment for the use of information technology. The Cypress College Technology Plan (8.1) provides a thoughtful and measured vision for how information technology is to be developed, used, and applied at the College over the next three years. The plan functions with the understanding that Cypress College is a multidisciplined institution with an emphasis in distinct academic and career-oriented divisions: Business & CIS, Health Science, Fine Arts, Language Arts, Social Science, Physical Education, Career Technical Education & Economic Development, and Science, Engineering & Mathematics. A practical approach is taken in balancing the need for information technology security with the need for flexible access of academic groups and operational areas. The plan also considers the importance of effective access to the College’s infrastructure and information assets from anywhere and at any time. Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Of significant value — though not addressed in the Technology Plan — is the commitment of Cypress College’s Academic Computing Staff to providing the college community with the technology resources and training necessary to thrive in this dynamic environment. Academic Computing staff members are quick to respond and resolve issues. They routinely evaluate new technologies and are purposeful in deploying them. Most importantly, they are focused on providing proactive solutions for the needs of the College and the college community. Members of Academic Computing are committed to doing their jobs efficiently, costeffectively, and with a positive attitude. The Academic Computing Staff of nine currently includes:

◊

1 Manager, Systems Technology Services (Interim)

◊

1 Administrative Assistant II

◊

2 PC Technicians: Responsible for 1600+ computers on campus

◊

1 User Support Analyst: Responsible for Helpdesk functions and email services

◊

2 Applications Support

• 1 responsible for the campus website and web based program development

• 1 responsible for Virtual Servers and program development

◊

2 IT Services Coordinators

• 1 responsible for the Network, Infrastructure, and security appliances

197

• 1 responsible for “after hours” support of the Network, Infrastructure, and classroom technology

The Academic Computing staff develops and promotes new instructional support technology and maintains current systems across campus. Considering the amount of equipment deployment in use (which expands each semester), staffing is lean for the number of computers and programs being served. Current computer and multimedia equipment supported by the Academic Computing Staff consists of:

◊

1619 computer systems (PC and MAC)

◊

24 Physical file servers

◊

45 Virtual file servers

◊

38 Computer labs

◊

6 Computer classrooms

◊

103 Instructional station classrooms

◊

~70 Smart technology classrooms

To aid staff members charged with daily maintenance and support, the College has been making its classrooms “smarter,” easier to use, and standardized across campus. Standardization of multimedia equipment (i.e. projectors, DVD/VCR players, and classroom computers and the addition of enterprise control systems) makes it possible to maintain, monitor, and operate systems remotely. Remote control of systems as well as providing instructors with more user-friendly tools to operate classroom multimedia has improved troubleshooting and instructor support. It should be noted that there is very little overlap of skill sets in support of the systems. However, every staff member continues to help one another when needed. Because of this, the Academic Computing staff have a close relationship with faculty. Staff are welcomed to conduct classroom observations to better understand faculty and student needs. This information gathering is crucial in matching the right technology for each instructional situation. Vendors also play a crucial role bringing their experiences with other educational institutions for evaluation in the College’s own environment. Additionally, Academic Computing staff work very closely with the campus Facilities Department in coordinating projects and ultimately providing complete systems. Technol198

ogy support and meeting the needs of learning, teaching, college-wide communications, research, and operational systems is truly a team effort and has been proven to be successful for all involved. The department continues to offer training for Groupwise (email), web editor, and CITRIX systems throughout the semester at various times to better facilitate staff and full-time and part-time faculty using these systems. The Academic Computing Department utilizes an inhouse web application to register faculty and staff in these classes. The Cypress College educational mission is supported by campus technology through Academic Computing, by District technology through NOCCCD Information Services, and by technological resources available through the State Chancellor’s Office. As an institution, the College employs various instruments to determine ongoing and future technological needs. More specifically, the College’s Technology Plan, Strategic Plan, Student Services Master Plan, and Educational Master Plan guide the technology needs of the campus. New technology is generally driven by instructional needs as defined by the College in the following plans. Campus Plans The Cypress College Education Master Plan (8.2) and the Cypress College Strategic Plan (8.3) are the guiding plans for the campus. An organizational chart of the College Strategic Plan illustrates how the campus planning committees work with one another and drive campus decisions. Identifying technology needs plays a key role in most of the Strategic Plan — and specifically in Directions 1 and 3 (8.3). Each campus division develops its own plan, included in the College’s Educational Master Plan, which has a technology component driven by internal assessments, curriculum, and student learning outcomes (SLOs). For example, the Business & CIS division has an advisory committee composed of community members and instructors who are experts in their respective fields of technology. Through this partnership, they assist in developing curriculum and identifying the lab equipment needed to train students in the latest technologies. The budget to support technology on an ongoing basis per the College’s Technology Plan is allocated by Cypress College

the campus. There are additional needs at the campus that are supported from a variety of sources. Any identified needs are brought to the attention of Planning and Budget Committee. The committee evaluates the importance as well as urgency of the need and tries to identify potential sources of funding. Needs of this nature are funded from grant money or carryover funds. In either case, the process involves need evaluation, implementation planning, and approval from the Planning and Budget Committee. Technology needs also play a significant role in the Cypress College Student Services Master Plan (8.4). Each of the subsections within this plan has a technology section identifying technological needs necessary to providing services to students. Academic Computing Operational Plans Academic Computing prepares the College Technology Plan (8.5) in consultation with the Cypress College Campus Technology Committee. Academic Computing operational support procedures are implemented to identify and support the computing needs across campus. PC Computers receive full hardware and software support including the Windows operating system and base software imaging. The campus-based software image includes virus protection, the Microsoft Office suite, the necessary clients for Novell, and Internet access. Apple Computer hardware systems are also fully supported. However, Apple software receives limited support. Academic Computing makes a “best effort” attempt to resolve issues and/or facilitate repairs through a third-party vendor. The Campus Technology Committee (CTC) & the Technology Plan The Campus Technology Committee (CTC) (8.5) is a shared-governance committee that reports to Planning and Budget with recommendations on the direction of technology on campus. This committee is a forum for addressing technology needs across the campus. Issues addressed by the CTC include maintenance, usage, and ongoing support policies and procedures. CTC is responsible for the annual review and for the implementation of the objectives defined in the Campus Technology Plan (8.1), which is submitted to the Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Planning and Budget Committee, all relevant campus constituent groups, and finally to the President’s Advisory Cabinet for approval. The Technology Plan encompasses the Computer Replacement Schedule (8.14), which, in conjunction with the physical inventory maintained by the Academic Computing Staff, ensures that campus computers are on a 3 to 5 year replacement cycle. The campus has committed annual one-time funding to this project with instructional computers having top priority. While the Computer Replacement Schedule is not a formal plan, Academic Computing does evaluate the systems up for replacement and develops a working plan with a strategy to leverage the College’s current investment and ultimately extending the usable life of the equipment in question. The Computer Replacement Schedule is created with consideration for current system usage, pending software upgrades and requirements, and necessary upgrades to systems. Using this schedule, the oldest computers are cycled out to surplus, stripped for spare parts, and in many cases, replaced with newer models.

Self Evaluation Technology effectiveness and use is measured both quantitatively and qualitatively. The Institutional Research Office helps to direct a campus-wide Program and Quality Review. Program Review allows for individual departments and programs to evaluate their needs including technology planning. It is the responsibility of each department or program to address its technology planning needs by seeking funding and approvals through the campus Planning and Budget process. Academic Computing provides consulting and specification recommendations for technology purchases as well as subsequent technology support. The Campus Services Quality Review Satisfaction Survey (8.6) performed during the Spring 2010 semester provided useful survey information about Academic Computing services. The survey results showed overall satisfaction in the quality and level of service and support provided by Academic Computing. The survey results indicated that, “Each core area was rated as favorable 84% of the time or greater.” Most respondents indicated that they were satisfied with the “overall quality of service” (92%). In addition, students indicated that they were most satisfied with “staff helpfulness” with a satisfaction rating of 96%.” (8.6, p.1)

199

A customer satisfaction survey (8.7) is offered electronically upon closure of every Trouble Log System ticket. Since the beginning of 2009, the Trouble Log surveys have been overwhelmingly positive. Two IT Technicians are responsible for over 1,600 computers on campus, and that number continues to grow each year. While the number of servers and desktop computers increases, the staff supporting those systems continues to remain static in number. Technology use is monitored through the interactions between Academic Computing and campus faculty and staff. Faculty and Academic Computing staff members work together to evaluate the needs of each instructional lab and determine a strategy to allow the labs to efficiently support instruction for the next 3 years. New technology is also funded and evaluated through federal, state, and community business partnerships such as the Perkins grant (8.8), which provides federal funding to improve Career Technical Education programs.

Planning Agenda None. 1.a. Technology services, professional support, facilities, hardware, and software are designed to enhance the operation and effectiveness of the institution.

Descriptive Summary Support for Overall Campus Functions The Technology Plan is used to support decisions made at all levels at Cypress College. Generally, total cost of ownership is a determining factor in technology decision making including costs for adoption, maintenance, support, replacement, licensing, and knowledge base costs. Academic Computing staff members also rely upon the experiences of their peers at other campuses and institutions across the state. Vendors play a key role in delivering new and emerging technology information by way of trade shows, webinars, personal visits, and equipment demonstrations. Gartner Group Research (8.9) is also available to help guide the direction the College takes in its choices of available technology.

200

Decisions regarding technology services, facilities, hardware, and software that require or could potentially require shared use districtwide are generally brought to the weekly District Technology Roundtable (DTR) (8.11) meeting. The IT Directors from Cypress College, Fullerton College, NOCCCD Information Services, (Anaheim campus), and the School of Continuing Education share ideas and determine whether to proceed collectively or at the campus level only. This committee meets weekly by conference call and once a month face to face to provide a forum for existing and potential vendors. DTRâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role is to collaborate on projects, share resources (Gartner Group Research) and ideas, and develop policy and standards where applicable. Some of the collaborative projects include Microsoft Agreement, Maintenance Contract review, Credit Card Processing, and an Emergency Notification System. A complete list of ongoing and potential projects is identified as â&#x20AC;&#x153;DTR Collaborative Projectsâ&#x20AC;? (8.15). Academic Computing is charged with managing the campus technology resources. Academic Computing uses many forums of information and collaboration available from varying sources in choices for meeting technology needs from the Wide Area Network to the classroom. The College decision-making process at the institutional level encompasses collaboratively created planning documents, standing committees, and ad hoc committees that oversee the planning for technology services, facilities, hardware, and software. Support for Distance Education The Cypress College Distance Education Program (DE) manages online and hybrid distance education course offerings. Selective DE resources are managed separately but in consultation with Academic Computing. Examples of available resources are Groupwise, Webmail, Web Editor, and Turnitin.com. Decisions regarding Distance Education technology resources are based on the goals and outcomes found in the DE Plan (8.10). Distance Education faculty members are served by the campus technology services available to all faculty and staff. These services include access to the Academic Computing Help Desk for any of their computing needs and access to the College website, which hosts the Distance Education site and individual faculty Cypress College

home pages. Distance Education is also serving as a pilot group for the development of a Virtual Desktop Interface (VDI) and ThinApp from VMWare. These services will allow Distance Education faculty to access a broader range of applications and files for themselves and their students and save the program and the College software licensing costs. In the future, VDI may ultimately be offered campuswide. The only official course management system for Cypress College Distance Education is Blackboard.com, version 9.1. The NOCCCD Information Services supports Distance Education technology at Cypress College with consultation services and automatic course management system enrollments (Snapshot) support between BANNER and Blackboard. Distance Education also contracts for Integration Customization Maintenance Support (ICM). ICM is an annual subscription-based upgrade maintenance program contracted specifically for Snapshot™. ICM provides coverage for data integration, including the use of existing integration tools, scheduled upgrade maintenance events, and troubleshooting in the event of unexpected behaviors. Blackboard Inc. advertises 99.7% uptime and safeguards against threats to physical and data security, natural disasters, and network outages of any kind. Academic Computing also provides additional storage support for Distance Education by using “EduStream” and providing on-campus storage services for DE training delivery. EduStream is a proprietary web service and web access portal created and maintained by the San Bernardino Community College District under grant funding by the California Community College Chancellor’s Office. Web-enhanced courses are not Distance Education courses and while they provide virtual resources online, no instruction takes place separated at a distance. District Information Services hosts the Luminis web portal called myGateway (8.22), which includes course support features designed for web-enhanced courses. Each course home page includes announcements, basic threaded discussions, limited link creation, file, and image upload. Faculty members also have the option of choosing Blackboard as a web-enhanced delivery tool.

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Self Evaluation The campus Technology Plan is serving the campus well in its current format in addition to being updated for continued use across campus. By collaborating with District Technology Roundtable (DTR) team members, the College has also realized monetary savings combining hardware and software purchases where possible, renegotiating Service Level Agreements (SLA) for existing maintenance contracts for both hardware and software, and working closer together addressing issues beneficial to all campuses. The Distance Education program continues to grow in course offerings and attendance and has successfully completed a major software upgrade. Finally, Academic Computing continues to grow its current deployment and knowledge base of Virtual Desktop Interface (VDI) systems including ThinApp applications for use across campus as an alternative to purchasing or replacing computers.

Planning Agenda None. 1.b. The institution provides quality training in the effective application of its information technology to students and personnel.

Descriptive Summary Development and creation of a training plan is part of any campus hardware or software adoption impacting college personnel. Student training is limited to access to the wireless Internet. Training for students is a campus-wide responsibility. Academic Computing provides wireless access training to staff and lab managers who, in turn, train students. Library faculty and staff provide instruction in the use of technological resources related to research and library use. The Learning Resource Center (LRC) coordinator and other staff members provide orientations for classes at the start of the semester and one-on-one help as needed with the technology on the open floor. The College’s instructional designer trains LRC staff to help online students with the course management system. A Reading Department faculty member ensures student competence in assisting students with Plato instructional software (8.24). Instructors and lab assistants train students on course-specific applications. Distance Education provides instructor training on 201

how to set up student orientation materials and offers support through the Distance Education Office for the course management system. Academic Computing provides faculty and staff training for all Enterprise, Office Productivity, and classroom technology systems. Additional training and support for classroom technology is offered by Staff Development and the Instructional Design Office (Appendix A). With the exception of myGateway, Academic Computing provides primary support for the systems defined below. myGateway receives primary support from District IT staff, and Cypress Academic Computing provides secondary support as needed. However, questions regarding myGateway generally filter through the Cypress College Helpdesk and are answered without escalating to District Helpdesk. Enterprise Systems

◊

myGateway: Staff Development provides support and training

◊

Remote Access to Administrative systems: Individualized training for Citrix

◊

Videoconferencing and Teleconferencing: Individualized training

◊

Wireless Access: Training provided to staff and lab managers

◊

Campus Website: Academic Computing oversees Datatel web management system user accounts; the Instructional Designer provides training for staff and faculty home page, department accounts, and special program Web Editor Accounts; support is offered through both the Instructional Design office and the Academic Computing Help Desk.

◊

Campus Surveillance: Individual training and support

Office Productivity

202

◊

Groupwise Email: group and individual training and support

◊

Personal Computing: application specific group and individual training and support for Microsoft Office and Windows OS

◊

Shared Storage: group and individual training and support for network drives

Classroom Technology

◊

Smart Classroom: group and individual training and support

◊

Technology Carts: group and individual training and support

◊

Course Management System: Distance Education provides faculty training and support

◊

TracDat: SLO Coordinator, the SLO Facilitator, and the Instructional Designer provides group and individual training and support.

Self Evaluation The Campus Services Quality Review Satisfaction Survey (8.6) performed during the Spring 2010 semester provided useful survey information about Academic Computing services. The purpose of the survey was to collect employee opinions about academic computing at Cypress College. The goal was to improve the quality of services provided by this area. A total of 235 responses were collected through an online survey distributed through campus email to all employees. Employees were then asked to rate academic computing on eleven measures of quality, including one measure of overall satisfaction, as well as two open ended questions asking for feedback about what was most helpful and what else could be done to help. The valid percent for “Excellent” and “Good” were combined to obtain a composite score of the percentage of favorable responses. Each core area was rated as favorable 84% of the time or greater. The six core areas were hours of operation, response time, clarity of procedures, usefulness of materials, staff helpfulness, and staff knowledge. Most respondents indicated that they were satisfied with the “overall quality of service” (92%). In addition, students indicated that they were most satisfied with “staff helpfulness” with a satisfaction rating of 96%. The survey also included four items that looked at satisfaction with various aspects of the area. With the recent changes to the College website, 66% said it was easy to find information on the web, and 73% said the Cypress College

information from the website was useful. With the newly added position to cover needs after normal business hours, over 77% of respondents said they were pleased with that service. In addition, 89% of respondents said the office has follow through on major technology projects. Overall, the quantitative measures and qualitative comments indicated the high level of service provided by Academic Computing is enjoyed and appreciated by the users. There were suggestions to improve the user-friendliness of the campus website.

End of Life information provided by manufacturers. This information gives Academic Computing the ability to produce a three- to five-year replacement schedule to help inform the campus Planning and Budget Committee of future expenditures. Since 2009, all District sites have been working together to review of software purchases to bring those purchases and annual maintenance costs under one contract when feasible.

Cypress College Academic Computing continues to work with the Campus Technology Committee (CTC) and the Campus Technology Plan in providing equipment, service, and support in addition to providing recommendations to the Planning and Budget Committee to fund future technology upgrades. It continues to update its three- to five-year technology planning documents for network infrastructure equipment replacement and work closer with faculty and staff in analyzing its current PC Replacement Plan needs. Additionally, it continues to look for ways to support technology on campus remotely and by providing additional training to staff and faculty as requested and necessary.

Academic Computing manages the campus systems on a daily basis. Some systems require hourly maintenance and/or monitoring to run at peak performance. Early warning systems for the critical Network Operations Center battery backup system and HVAC systems are in place with text messaging and email status reports sent to staff mobile phones. Maintenance is accomplished both in-house and through outside vendors. Operational Maintenance is administered by Academic Computing staff and backed up by Service Level Agreements from third-party vendors. Hardware support is administered by third-party Service Level Agreements generally encompassing 24-hour service five days a week.

Planning Agenda None. 1.c. The institution systematically plans, acquires, maintains, and upgrades or replaces technology infrastructure and equipment to meet institutional needs.

Descriptive Summary Academic Computing routinely tracks annual maintenance and life expectancy of its Enterprise network infrastructure equipment. It takes advantage of savings in annual maintenance costs through equipment standardization under one district-wide contract. The campus Computer Replacement Schedule assumes a threeto five-year life cycle. However, in 2010 the College is in the second year of making a more detailed analysis of computers up for replacement in an effort to leverage current investment and deployment. Instructional systems are top priority in those decisions. Academic Computing maintains a listing of its Enterprise infrastructure equipment similar to the Computer Replacement Schedule (8.14) that includes End of Service and Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Self Evaluation

Maintenance contracts and expenditures are monitored and reviewed by Academic Computing in March of each year to plan for each new fiscal year. All Cisco Networking equipment maintenance is contracted under one contract for the entire District. Physical Infrastructure The Cypress College Physical Infrastructure was built to Sumitomo and Systimax manufacturer’s specifications with full manufacturer warranty (20 year) standards to address any related issues. Server Technology Campus server technology includes the following applications to monitor and manage the various systems used to support the campus community needs.

◊

VMware View: Managed from the view desktop manager and has built-in responses for memory, CPU and storage alerts

◊

Vcenter: Monitors and alerts to identify problems with the ESX environment 203

supporting the bulk of the College’s server farm

◊

services to campus network users.

◊

Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS): All Critical Campus systems and devices are physically connected to Enterprise UPS. In the event of power fluctuation or a complete campus-wide power failure, critical components will roll to an onsite UPS and continue to operate normally for approximately 90 minutes. Once the UPS is exhausted, a generator will be used to continue operations on a continuous basis until power is restored.

◊

District Backup: Cypress College is also directly connected to the District Information Systems. The District IT Systems also have battery backup (UPS) systems in addition to being directly connected to their site generator.

Windows 2008 server: Provides built-in support used to manage and identify issues with user logins

Network Infrastructure The Cisco Electronics supporting the College logical infrastructure are kept under continuous maintenance agreements, which entitle the College to software updates and support. Each of the 37 data rooms on campus is physically cleaned on a rotational basis to maintain an optimum environment in an effort to maximize equipment life. Academic Computing upgrades technologies and explores new technologies to keep a high degree of automatic redundancy for services offered on and off campus.

204

◊

2008 Server: The 2008 server supports file replication and a domain base distributer file system providing real time file redundancy spread across 2 to 4 servers depending on the critical nature of the files. In Summer 2010, AVAMAR replaced tape backup with real time redundant disk backup.

◊

Dell M100E: A blade chassis that offers triple power redundancy, quad network redundancy dual SAN redundancy and up to 16 redundant blades. The MDF also has the ability to be hooked up to an external generator to provide power to the core system if the outage will last more than the 90 minutes of inline battery backup that is currently in place. Electrical plans are in the process of being drawn to permanently connect one of the campus generators to the MDF electrical panel for emergence power.

◊

Cypress College Logical infrastructure: Designed to provide logical redundancy to each building on campus. The design principles employed have built-in redundancy, which allows for a single Core Switch to fail and still provide continuous

Planning Agenda None. 1.d. The distribution and utilization of technology resources support the development, maintenance, and enhancement of its programs and services.

Descriptive Summary The Campus Technology Committee (8.5) is comprised of representatives from faculty, management, students, and staff. The committee meets monthly to coordinate the technology needs of the campus with the goals of the Cypress College Educational Master Plan (8.2), Strategic Plan (8.3), the Campus Technology Plan (8.1), and the Student Services Master Plan (8.4). The Academic Computing Department gathers input from the Campus Technology Committee as well as information, needs, and concerns from members/ groups of the campus community in order to promote effective and efficient use of technology and develop technological partnerships among campus programs and departments. Examples of this type of information gathering and collaboration would include recent projects for classrooms in the Humanities building. When funding was made available to remodel the Humanities building, Academic Computing met with members of the faculty to upgrade the technology carts used in the Cypress College

classrooms. This effort also included a visit to a neighboring community college before final decisions were made in purchasing equipment. Once the needs were identified, an equipment list developed, and cart placement finalized, the project was incorporated into the building project’s plans. Prior to the building opening for classes, training sessions were developed and made available to faculty in addition to hard-copy documentation placed with each technology cart in all 48 classrooms. Another key addition to the new building was a need to develop computerized classrooms, three in total. Due to the number of computer workstations needed in conjunction with limited table space in each of the three rooms, a collaborative decision was made between Academic Computing, the division dean, and faculty teaching in these rooms to use Virtural Desktop Interface (VDI) technology. One of the main concerns for this project was trying to identify a system that would allow for optimum table space for students to complete assignments alone and in collaboration with one another. Basic Skills Grant monies were sought after and subsequently awarded to the division to complete the project, and all three classrooms are being fully utilized. These are just two examples of the kind of thought processes and collaboration that takes place to provide faculty and students the best possible solutions to enhance the teaching and learning experience at Cypress College. Portions of grant monies are also used to upgrade technology in classrooms and labs. As newer systems are purchased and integrated, they become the new standard for many divisions across campus to use in classrooms.

data security in addition to Payment Card Industry/ Data Security Standards (PCI/DSS) for the handling of credit card transactions across campus. Data and systems security are also a district-wide function as illustrated in the District Technology Roundtable (DTR) Collaborative Projects List (8.15). NOCCCD is also developing a District standard for information security specific to the campuses and District Enterprise System (8.22). Security of both the campus and wide-area network infrastructures are randomly tested on an annual basis and consistently receive a “B” rating for network security, which is a satisfactory rating for system/infrastructure/network security to prohibiting threats or attacks to its data network. The following Security devices are deployed on the Cypress College Campus Network.

◊

Firewall ASA 5550: Network edge Enterprise firewall is used to protect the campus from malicious attacks from outside Internet sources. Common attacks would include Denial of Service and Port Scan attacks.

◊

SCM 3200 Appliance: The Network Edge email scanning appliance. This appliance is used to scan all inbound email for viruses, SPAM and phishing signatures and quarantine this traffic based on policy prior to being delivered to a user mail box. This policy is designed to stop the propagation of malicious traffic that may be undetected by the end user.

◊

Safeconnect NAC: This appliance is used for Network Access Control of Campus wireless network users. The Appliance enforces the posture of a wireless device prior to the device gaining access to the campus network. The level of security is based on policy defined by administrators. The policy includes Os patch level, virus and spyware definitions, and music sharing and download policy.

◊

Bluecoat Packet Shaper: This appliance is used to manage network bandwidth and network protocols. The appliance is also used to identify and ultimately stop malicious traffic that may have infected

Self Evaluation On a daily basis, Cypress College employs the tools and applications necessary to ensure the security and integrity of the campus network and infrastructure. These appliances and applications are essential to network administrators to aid in ensuring a secure network environment for staff and student user communities in an ongoing effort to prevent data loss in addition to malicious attacks against network services. A high level of human intervention is involved in securing a network from malicious attack. As an educational institution, the College operates under FERPA Guidelines for Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

205

◊

staff or student workstations.

◊

McAfee Desktop Suite: Application resides locally on all campus workstations scanning for viruses and malicious applications that may embed themselves on campus workstations.

Learning Center Lab: Component of the Learning Resource Center in the LLRC

◊

Writing and Reading Lab: Component of the Learning Resource Center in the LLRC

◊

Computer Applications and Office Technology Labs: Business & CIS division

◊

Disabled Students Program and Services classroom: DSPS

◊

Photography Lab: Technical Education II

◊

Computer Graphics Lab: Fine Arts building

◊

Distance Learning Lab: Component of the Learning Resource Center in the LLRC, not associated with Distance Education

◊

Math Lab: Component of the Learning Resource Center in the LLRC

Cisco Access Control Server: Used by Academic Computing to manage Secure Access to all campus network switches, routers and access points. The function of this server is to prevent unauthorized access to network devices. The ability of the application to log all attempts to access these devices provides insight to administrators regarding the presence of potential intruders.

Additional Security Features

Virus Protection: Anti-Virus software is part of the standard software package on College computers and configured to update on a daily basis.

Password Protection: All computer accounts must have a password.

Network Segregation: The network is divided into two parts: an administrative/ staff area and a student area. Only the administrative/staff area has access to the College’s Banner system.

Server Backup: All Enterprise servers are backed up on a regular basis

Spam Filters: Academic Computing implemented anti-spam/anti-virus software for its Groupwise email system and to monitor network traffic.

Software Updates: The Groupwise email system was upgraded in January 2010 to the latest version to make the system more robust.

Computer labs and/or stations are available throughout the College to support teaching and learning and student services. Software in these labs is generally updated at the beginning of each academic year so that students have access to the most up-to-date software the campus can deploy and support. 206

Students also have access to computers in various campus locations to access Internet services and College services; more specifically, in the Student Services building, Admissions and Records for online registration, the Career and Transfer Centers, and the Student Activity Center. The campus infrastructures are designed and built based upon the District’s Telecommunications Standards (8.16). All cabling is designed and built holding a 15- to 20-year warranty in performance and workmanship. Any new construction or additional work must follow these standards and warranties. The College is on its third revision of the District Telecommunications Standards (8.17) document, which serves as a planning guide for architects working with the District to improve current facilities and create new facilities as funding becomes available. Needs for renovated or new buildings are assessed to assure that the College provides the technology best suited for the learning environment. This has resulted in new smart classrooms that have “plug and play” computer systems for the instructors to use. These classrooms also have ceilingmounted projectors, sound systems, Internet connection, DVD and video capabilities, and document cameras. Cypress College

The College provides both computer equipment and servers in support of Distance Education courses. Distance Education faculty are assigned computers, either desktops or laptops, to support their courses. These computers were upgraded in the Desktop Rollout replacement. The Desktop Rollout Project provided a computer to all full-time faculty and access to shared computers for part-time faculty. The College provides computer equipment (PCs) to each full-time faculty member’s office. Laptops are also made available to faculty each semester for checkout. Adjunct faculty have a workroom for use on campus that includes PCs and printers. The campus PC Replacement Plan allows for a number of these systems to be upgraded as newer systems are purchased for instructional labs. The older systems are identified and replaced on a “First In-First Out” method.

Planning Agenda None. 2. Technology planning is integrated with institutional planning. The institution systematically assesses the effective use of technology resources and uses the results of evaluation as the basis for improvement.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College is nearing the end of a construction cycle spurred by passage of a local bond measure in 2002 (8.23). The decisions made during this recent renovation and expansion of the campus emanated from planning a process that solicited input and collaboration from all impacted parties. For each construction project, the employees who would occupy the space were interviewed by the project planners. Likewise, the project planning and implementation included technology representation from both the campus and district level. Decisions were also made using information from the previous Educational Master Plan (8.2). Cypress College Academic Computing area is reviewed as part of the Campus Support Services area. These services completed a Quality Review in 2004, 2007, and 2010. Such comprehensive reviews include utilization of a Campus Services Quality Review Satisfaction Survey (8.6). There are a number of additional methods utilized to determine that technology needs in Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

program and service areas are met beyond the results of the Cycle of Quality Review. The College’s Campus Technology Committee follows a shared-governance model, with representation from across all constituencies. This group provides guidance and feedback on the utilization of technology and the needs of the campus. Along with employee and student involvement, there are a number of campus documents that address the technology needs of the College. Such documents include the Technology Plan (8.1), the Distance Education Plan (8.10), the Institutional Effectiveness Report (8.19), the Student Services Master Plan (8.4), the Facilities Plan (8.20), the Strategic Plan for 2008-2011(8.3), the Educational Master Plan (8.2) and the Basic Skills Action Plans (8.21). The prioritization of technology needs occurs on a number of levels. Individual programs and departments are permitted to make technology purchases within budget allocations while working in conjunction with Academic Computing. However, the primary method involves the campus-wide “one-time” budget process, through the Planning and Budget Committee. This process provides the framework for financial resources for replacement hardware, technology, and media. This funding has been given a high priority in the past or has even been funded ahead of the process. Generally funding is provided based on the Replacement Plan for that given year (8.25).

Self Evaluation Technology has generally received a high priority, but the competition for funding has increased while stateallocated resources have dwindled. The College is able to meet its immediate and pressing technology needs through creative solutions such as utilization of thin clients and virtualization in order to meet the demands of a growing desktop-computer replacement need on campus. The College and District can point to a number of successes in recent years as an indicator of effectiveness in meeting the needs of the campus. Specific successes include: the deployment of a new website, implementation of the myGateway student portal, expansion of online-based education, deployment of a campus-wide wireless network, implementation of a campus-wide video system, installation of electronic marquees and scoreboards, the opening of four new buildings and 207

the provision of technology needs in swing space during construction, installation of servers to facilitate a virtual environment, and the design and deployment of “smart classroom” technology and technology carts across the campus.

8.12

Appendix A

8.14

Campus Computer Replacement Schedule

Academic Computing is also regarded across the college community as being a responsive group both in terms of short-term, immediate computer-repair needs and long-term, bigger picture issues. This feedback is received via online surveys sent to campus email for “trouble tickets” that have been completed (8.26). The department is responsive to end user’s needs and questions. One such instance resulted in extending the campus video-monitoring system onto laptop computers for use in the campus safety vehicles over the campus wireless network.

8.16 sion

Planning Agenda None.

8.15 District Technology Roundtable Collaborative Projects List District Telecommunications Standards, Third Revi-

8.17 Learning Resource Center (LRC) Technology Resources 8.18 Cypress College Climate Survey 2010 — www. cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ rsurveys.aspx 8.19 Institutional Effectiveness Report — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rreports. aspx 8.20

Facilities Plan

8.21 Basic Skills Action Plans — www.cypresscollege. edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 8.22 myGateway website — mygateway.nocccd.edu/cp/ home/loginf

Reference Documents 8.1 Cypress College Technology Plan — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 8.2 Cypress College Education Master Plan — www. cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ pdocuments.aspx

8.23

Measure X Bond passed for renovation projects

8.24 Learning Resource Center (LRC) Technology Resources document 8.25

Replacement Plan

8.26

Online Survey Results

8.3 Cypress College Strategic Plan, 2008-2011 — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 8.4 Cypress College Student Services Master Plan, 2007-2014 — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 8.5

Campus Technology Committee

8.6 Campus Services Quality Review Satisfaction Survey 2010 — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rsurveys.aspx 8.7

Customer Satisfaction Survey

8.8

Perkins Grant

8.9

Gartner Group Research

8.10 Cypress College Distance Education Plan — www. cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ pdocuments.aspx 8.11

208

Directors Technology Roundtable (DTR) Committee

Cypress College

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

209

Appendix

Chart for organizing information: IIIC 1.b What technology training does the institution provide to students and personnel? How does the institution ensure that the training and technical support it provides for faculty and staff are appropriate and effective? How effective is the training provided?

210

Cypress College

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

211

212

Cypress College

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

213

214

Cypress College

Standard IIID: Financial Resources The success of the College is dependent on sound, prudent fiscal practices to support the Mission of the College. Through the past several years, Cypress has been innovative in conserving its resources. In recent years, the College has had to adapt in the face of reductions of State funding. This is evident by the positive results of the external Financial and Compliance annual audits. The College community is well informed regarding financial issues and Board actions that have an impact on the operations and the ability to provide quality education. Campus constituents are able to provide feedback by various methods to assist with utilizing financial resources appropriately. 1. The institution relies upon its mission and goals as the foundation for financial planning. 1.a. Financial planning is integrated with and supports all institutional planning.

Descriptive Summary The College’s financial planning and budget development processes reflect the vision, mission, core values, priorities, and goals of the College. The Planning and Budget Committee (PBC), a college-wide shared-governance committee, serves as the primary recommending body to the President’s Advisory Cabinet (PAC) on general planning and budget issues for the campus and conveys to PAC the views of the campus community on matters relevant to both planning and budget for the College. At the onset of each budget planning cycle, PBC reviews the mission and goals of the College as part of the fiscal planning and preparation process. PBC identifies goals and actions for campus-wide involvement. Priorities for annual planning and budgeting are established by measures of broad institutional effectiveness and department or program goals established through cyclical quality review processes (9.1). At the last accreditation cycle, the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior College (ACCJC) recommended that an Educational Master Plan (EMP) be written. The College took steps to develop an EMP to serve as the “foundational document” for the comprehensive planning process. The Educational Master Plan was completed and submitted to ACCJC on October 15, 2006. The EMP, which covers a ten-year Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

period, is the umbrella for other College plans. Most importantly, the EMP focuses the directions of the Strategic Plan, which is the vehicle to guide short-term and long-term decision making including resource allocation. At each budget development cycle, the College sets goals for achievement that include enrollment growth targets, full-time faculty obligation, development of new programs and business partnerships, facilities and maintenance needs, contract commitments, and other long-term commitments as evidenced in the Department Planning and Program Review for Instructional and Student Support Services areas and Campus Support Services (9.2). Every three years, Instructional Program Review allows faculty to evaluate how well a program is serving students and how it is related to the mission of the institution. The instructional program review takes a critical look at the resources that have been allocated and that are required to run a program successfully. After an overall evaluation of the quantitative and qualitative data pertaining to a program, the Program Review Committee prepares its report and ultimately the program review process is expected to make continuous improvement to the quality of instruction offered to students. The following describes the College’s standard practice regarding one-time budget requests; however, in response to the state budget crisis for 2009 and 2010, the process was temporarily suspended. The Planning and Budget Committee recommended in 2009 that in light of the serious reduction in funds available from the state, only critical-need items would be considered. This mitigated the need for the work-intensive regular process. In consideration of this special circumstance, the Direction Committees were not required to convene. For the 2010-2011 academic year, because the state budget crisis had not been resolved, and in consideration of the fact that the College’s Strategic Plan objectives were nearly complete, the Planning and Budget Committee recommended that the convening of the Direction Committees should once again be deferred. Based upon the College’s current understanding of projections for the next budget cycle, it is anticipated that the standard practice will resume in 2011. Each Spring, the campus-wide budget request process is implemented. The One-Time budget request pro215

cess and timeline is distributed via an “allusers” email in December. Step-by-step instructions are provided to complete the necessary budget forms (9.3). Each of the College’s eighteen Budget Units begins discussing their individual program needs as addressed in their program reviews and department goals. Faculty, staff, budget managers, and administrators work together to develop their budget requests and use a shared-governance process to select their top priorities to submit as requests for funding (9.4). These requests must each identify which one of the five Directions of the Strategic Plan it supports. All forms and instructions can be easily accessed on the College’s J: drive. By the deadline set forth in the timeline, each Budget Unit submits its prioritized budget requests to the Business and Auxiliary Services Office. The office then coordinates the distribution of the campus-wide requests to the chairpersons of the five directional committees, one representing each direction of the Strategic Plan. Any requests that identify health/safety/security issues are reviewed separately by the Campus Safety Committee for completion of a risk assessment report. The Campus Safety Committee may consult with outside professionals, if needed, to assist in the risk assessment. PBC uses the Planning and Budget Safety Review form to evaluate and identify items earmarked to be given highest priority (9.5). Certain requests that require year-to-year funding to maintain a program or involve broader legal issues that require immediate response from the campus may be given higher priority by the Planning and Budget Committee. These high priority requests are pulled from the priority process to be included in an Advanced Funding list. The committee may choose to fund these items immediately without submitting them to a Direction Committee. The Vice President of Administrative Services then convenes a meeting of the chairpersons of the five Directional Committees to review the prioritization process and to verify the appropriate committee placement of the requests. Then each of the five Direction Committees meet to prioritize the requests from the Budget Units. The priority of the Budget Unit may be considered, but the work of the Direction Committees is based upon the following criteria:

216

◊

Supports College mission, Educational Master Plan, Student Services Master Plan and Strategic Plan

◊

Growth of programs and/or work area

◊

Quality of program and/or work area

◊

Demonstrated need within the Budget Unit

◊

Support of health/safety/security issues

A representative of the Budget Unit may be called to clarify requests for the Direction Committee, if needed. Upon review and discussion of all the requests, each Direction Committee develops one list of recommended priorities to submit to the Planning and Budget Committee. Priorities of the Directional Committees are honored, if possible; however, on occasion, the Planning and Budget Committee may alter the recommended priority, if in its estimation, there is reason to do so. The Planning and Budget Committee develops one final campus-wide list of prioritized requests and forwards the list to the President’s Advisory Cabinet (PAC) with a recommendation for funding. PAC reviews the prioritized requests at its last meeting in May. Early in the following Fall semester, the Planning and Budget Committee identifies all available sources of funding to help support the list of budget requests. Additionally, restrictions of specific grant funds that are identified to fund items on the prioritized list may drive some decisions on funding priorities that appear out of order. The Executive Vice President of Educational Programs and Support Services and the Vice President of Administrative Services work together with the division deans and the many campus constituencies to achieve balanced and effective financial planning that supports the College’s programs, goals, and strategies. Since the primary method the State uses to allocate resources is by full-time equivalent students (FTES), the monitoring of FTES is critical to the successful operation of the College. Not generating enough FTES can result in reduced apportionment income, and generating more than the State-established cap can result in unfunded enrollment. Establishing an appropriate FTES strategy and budget parameter, therefore, is fundamental to the budgeting process. The District establishes priorities among competing needs by holding several discussions at District Planning Council Meetings (DPC). DPC is a district-wide committee comprised of all constituency representation and chaired by the Chancellor. Based on the committee’s work, a Cypress College

framework for the budget process is established and any necessary shifts are made to annual FTES targets. An integral part of the District’s budget comes from resources carried over from prior-year operations. The budget center carryovers can be used to backfill budget reductions, purchase instructional equipment, assist with overtime and hourly support, supplement extended-day budgets, or pay any other expense deemed a priority by the budget center or identified as a goal in the College-wide Strategic Plan. Requests are channeled through departmental planning processes such as program reviews and goals set by each department (9.6). The College regularly reviews its Strategic Plan, Educational Master Plan, Student Services Master Plan, and the Five-Year Construction Plan. Different campus constituencies have ample opportunities and are encouraged and invited to participate in the budget development process. Campus-wide planning and the established strategic priorities drive the budget allocation process. The Planning and Budget Committee oversees major decisions related to the budget, including allocation of carryover funds and establishment of a contingency fund for unanticipated needs. The budget allocation process at Cypress College is broadly divided in two areas. As is the case for most postsecondary educational institutions, the major part of the budget is in personnel and fixed expenses such as benefits, maintenance and operations, and insurance. The personnel position part of the budget process is rolled over from one year to the next by the District Finance Staff. Other budget line items are entered at the campus level after the District office calculates the revenue anticipated and allocates resources to the colleges to perform budget data entry. Centralizing allocation of some budgets helps achieve economies of scale for major purchases such as healthcare or insurance. The College oversees the allocation of campus carryover funds and grant funds. Carryover funds are generated from multiple areas. As the name suggests, any unutilized fund at the end of the year in department budget is carried over and designated as the College fund. Apart from unspent funds, a large part of the carryover fund is received from revenues from the weekly Swap Meet on the College campus. Allocation of these funds and any grant funding is completed at the College. The allocation of grant funds is made according to the guidelines of the grant. The dean in charge of grants allocates the funds in conInstitutional Self Study — Spring 2011

sultation with grant-makers and the grant’s committee (if any). For example, there is a consultative committee for the Perkins Grant on campus that is responsible for implementation of the Perkins Grant (9.7). The carryover funds are used to provide support for emergency needs, one-time funding needs, and special projects. The President’s Staff recommends the allocation of carryover funds. The Planning and Budget Committee (PBC) reviews the recommendation and upon approval, forwards the recommendation to the President’s Advisory Cabinet (PAC). Both PBC and PAC are comprised of representatives from all constituencies on the campus, and both these bodies make decisions that are based on consensus. Once funds are allocated, the Vice President’s office calls for proposals from the campus. The proposals are evaluated by all members of PBC individually, and upon consensus, funding recommendations are made to PAC (9.8). Electronic communications are sent to the entire campus community via “allusers” mail for relevant topics such as the annual one-time budget request process and the classified staff needs assessment. The tentative budget submitted to the Board each June provides the basis for managing and monitoring expenditures early in the year. Once the Board approves the tentative budget, the District has an operating plan until the official state budget is finalized and a final budget can be developed and approved by the Board. It is the benchmark against which to measure fiscal performance for the remainder of the fiscal year. The budget reports, audit reports, and Retiree Benefits Actuarial Study Reports are posted on the District’s website (9.9).

Self Evaluation At each budget development process, the College aims to link budget allocations and funding for staffing to program reviews and other College planning documents. Planning documents are presented to the Board and are made available to all campus constituents participating in the budget planning process. Major planning documents include: Five-Year Construction Plan (9.10), Educational Master Plan (9.11), Student Services Master Plan (9.12), and Strategic Plan (9.13). As a consequence of the institution’s emphasis on planning processes, a new section of the employee survey 217

Figure 1

was included asking about employees’ knowledge and involvement in planning (Figure 1). For each of the following six questions, administrators were more likely to agree than either faculty or staff:

◊

I am aware of the planning process

◊

I know how to participate in the planning process

◊

I participate in the planning process

◊

My participation influences the outcome of the planning process

◊

I think the planning process helps the college achieve its desired goals

◊

I am encouraged to participate in the planning process

Similarly, full-time faculty were more likely to agree than part-time faculty, and those who are involved in a shared-governance committee were more likely to agree to these same items than those not involved.

Planning Agenda None. 1.b. Institutional planning reflects realistic assessment of financial resource availability, development of financial resources, partner218

ships, and expenditure requirements.

Descriptive Summary The District provides easy access to financial documents that clearly indicate the budgeted allocations to those involved in institutional planning. Each Budget Unit has the capability to pull reports of its current budget status by accessing Banner. Administrators and budget managers regularly use this information to project future needs. The District maintains its general ledger using the Banner operating system as well as a dually maintained system at the Orange County Department of Education (OCDE). Historically, all of the funds designated as District funds (e.g., General, Bond, Capital Outlay, Self Insurance, Retiree Benefits, Financial Aid, and Child Development Funds) have been dually maintained within Banner and OCDE. Any changes on major expense categories or changes to contingency reserves are clearly explained in the reports. At regularly scheduled meetings, the Board ratifies all contracts, personnel hiring, and purchase orders with expense implications that affect the bottom line. In accordance with §58310 of Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations, the Chief Executive Officer of the District submits the CCFS-3IIQ report showing the financial and budgetary conditions of the District — including outstanding obligations — to the governCypress College

ing Board. The Chief Executive Officer also prepares a quarterly report based on measurements and standards as established by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges and certified on forms provided by the State Chancellor. This report is reviewed by the District Board and entered into the minutes of a regularly scheduled meeting (9.14). In the CCFS3IIQ report, a summary of the general fund revenues, expenses, and fund balance for the prior fiscal year is detailed. This report is submitted to CCCSO in conjunction with the Adopted Budget for the current fiscal year. These documents describing the District’s financial standing are regularly referenced throughout the year by budget managers and administrators as they engage in fiscal planning and address budget issues. The many campus-wide constituencies involved in institutional planning include department coordinators, department managers, division deans, categorical program managers, and grant program administrators, as well as the Board (9.15). Funding priorities identified in the budget parameters include support of student learning, growth and quality of programs, support of College mission, the Educational Master Plan, the Student Services Master Plan, and the Strategic Plan. Focus on student learning is given top priority. The goals of Direction One of the Strategic Plan is to design, enhance, and deliver a comprehensive instruction to promote academic excellence and student learning. A significant portion of the College’s carryover funds are used to address student learning, which include addressing program needs, updating instructional equipment, library collection updates, classroom furniture replacement, technology upgrades, and tutor hiring. Some programs and projects identified for “advance” funding during the 2009-2010 year included TracDat software implementation to house and develop student learning outcomes (SLOs), Blackboard licensing, tutoring, Teacher’s Preparation, the Legacy Program, Staff Development, Academic Computing, and the Diversity Committee (9.16).

the delivery of services at the same time as the College is experiencing its highest demand for classes and services. The College is being forced to reevaluate hours of service, course offerings, and staffing to address real and budget reductions. The College is using campus vacant staff positions (managers, classified, and faculty) and carryover funds to buffer budget shortfalls. Layoffs and furloughs for employees have been avoided through the 2009-2010 school year.

Planning Agenda None. 1.c. When making short-range financial plans, the institution considers its long-range financial priorities to assure financial stability. The institution clearly identifies and plans for payment of liabilities and future obligations.

Descriptive Summary

Self Evaluation

The College has an excellent reputation in the community it serves. The College is committed to promoting student learning and success, embracing diversity, contributing to the economic and social development of the surrounding community, and being open to all qualified students pursuing their educational goals. Being in a growth district, the College takes carefully planned measures to ensure that sufficient funds are allocated to support student access. With the College’s understanding of budget formulas at the State level and how the State growth calculations impact the College, each year the College ensures that data and statistical information are collected and reported to the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. The management of enrollment is done via careful data tracking through the Enrollment Management System (EMS) and through ongoing dialogue with division deans both in the instruction area as well as student services area. Discussions in the areas of enrollment growth, changes in demographics, outreach plans, and marketing strategies set the tone and direction of the College’s long-term planning.

The College has followed a coordinated, inclusive, fiscally sound process of achieving its funding goals. Its funding priorities are centered on student learning as it uses the Educational Master Plan as the overriding framework and vehicle to making resource allocations (9.1). The State budget deficit is having an impact on

As part of the long-term planning, the College engages in discussions and decision making on the appropriate number of sections, its associated operating expenses, as well as facilities requirements. In Fall 2009, the District engaged the assistance of a consulting firm to coordinate the needed input to develop a new ten-year

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

219

Educational and Facilities Master Plan. Key faculty and staff provide input to develop this document. The resulting plan will serve to inform and drive the fiscal planning process and budget allocation at the District level. The District’s most recent annual external audit of its financial positions and activities was completed in June 30, 2009. The District reported according to the standards of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statements No. 34 and No. 35 using the Business Type Activity (BTA) model as recommended by the California Community College Chancellor’s Office. As of June 30, 2009, the District ended the fiscal year with a healthy surplus due to prior year’s prudent fiscal management in anticipation of challenging budget times ahead. However, there is still significant concern for the 2009-2010 fiscal year and future budget years as there remains an overall structural deficit in the State budget. The economic position of the District is closely tied to that of the State of California. Currently, the North Orange County Community College District is working through the budget woes centering on deep ongoing cuts from the State — in particular to categorical program funding. The District’s management will continue to closely monitor the State budget information and will maintain a close watch over resources to sustain its ability to react to internal and external issues (9.17). Also in accordance of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statements No. 34 and No. 35, the District has provided an overview of assets, liabilities, and net assets as of the end of the fiscal year. The Statement of Net Assets is a point-in-time financial statement that presents a fiscal snapshot of the District. The Statement of Net Assets presents end-of-year date concerning assets (current and non-current), liabilities (current and non-current), and net assets (assets minus liabilities). From the data presented, readers of the Statement of Net Assets are able to determine the assets available to continue the operations of the District. How much the District owes vendors and employees can also be determined. Finally, the Statement of Net Assets provides a picture of the net assets and their availability for expenditure by the District (9.18). Through prudent budgeting and planning, the District has maintained a healthy reserve level to position itself favorably as the State struggles 220

through budget turmoil and structural deficit. When making short-range financial plans, the College considers every aspect of the College’s operations and how these immediate plans will impact long-term fiscal planning and priorities. The District has few longterm liabilities and those that it has are largely offset by revenues from numerous sources. An integral part of the District’s budget comes from resources carried over from prior-year operations. The ending balance on June 30, 2009, was $38,488,658, which is an increase of $8,019,956 from the previous year (9.19). The District continuously monitors and evaluates its own fiscal health. It is aware that in the coming years, issues pertaining to the increased cost of retiree health and welfare will impact the District’s financial horizon. Currently, in accord with GASB 45, the District recognizes an annual expense on its financial statements for the sum of ongoing annual out-of-pocket retiree benefit costs, plus an amortized annual actuarially determined amount necessary to recognize the entire unfunded obligation over a period not to exceed 30 years. Based upon the District’s most recent actuarial study, as of June 30, 2008, the District’s actuarially determined unfunded liability was estimated at $158 million, and the District’s annual required contribution (ARC) was $12.3 million. To date, the District has accumulated $49 million in the Retiree Benefits fund and expended $4.7 million in 2008-2009 of the ARC (9.20). Since 2002 and the passing of Measure X, the College has received $80.3 million for remodeling and for new buildings. It also received another $30 million through State Capital Outlay funding. With this funding, the campus addressed many of the facilities needs identified in the 1999 Facilities Master Plan. As part of the continuing planning process, the District will once again conduct an update of its Educational and Facilities Master Plan to address the educational needs of faculty and students. The District will look into the potential of a new combination of Local and State bond fund programs to complete the projects delineated in the most recent Facilities Master Plan (9.45).

Self Evaluation In spite of the challenges associated with the state budget, the District is financially stable. It makes short-term plans by carefully considering the long-range financial implications and has established plans for payment of its long-term obligations. The District has no CerCypress College

tificates of Participation (COPs) to offset. It regularly monitors its financial standing through regular budget monitoring, quarterly reports, and the annual external audit (9.43).

Planning Agenda None. 1.d. The institution clearly defines and follows its guidelines and processes for financial planning and budget development with all constituencies having appropriate opportunities to participate in the development of institutional plans and budgets.

Descriptive Summary The College follows a shared-governance process whereby all affected persons have an opportunity to provide feedback into decision making, directly or through representation, and have those suggestions seriously considered. The rationale for the final decision on planning and budget matters is communicated to all campus constituents. As the budget is developed, budget requests, budget parameters, and meeting minutes are all recorded and made available on the College’s shared J: drive (9.8). The Planning and Budget Committee (PBC), which meets bi-monthly, is the primary recommending body to the President’s Advisory Cabinet (PAC) on general planning and budget issues for the campus. PBC uses the Educational Master Plan and the Strategic Plan to drive its budget decision making. Each campus Budget Unit is expected to submit its budget requests based on its responsibility for accomplishing the goals and objectives identified in their respective Program Reviews. The Planning and Budget Committee also provides the context on how the District’s financial planning and budget process takes place. The Board adopts the tentative budget in June for the next fiscal year to provide the District with an operating plan until the Proposed Budget is approved by the Board of Trustees in September. Presentations are made detailing the budget development and planning process at each site and how the process is driven by the District-wide Strategic Plan. The College uses the Banner system as its financial budget and reporting system. The Office of the Vice President of Administrative Services provides the financial management and planning oversight and, Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

through clearly delineated procedures, ensures that the resources received from the District are accounted for and disbursed appropriately. The College, through scheduled program review cycles, reviews and monitors for the appropriateness of the level of support provided to various departmental programs and services.

Self Evaluation Because educational planning and goals are the engine that drive the College’s fiscal planning, which determines the District’s financial forecast, it can be said that the District has been successful at designing a strong financial foundation that is supportive of the instructional programs and mission of the College. The District’s accounting of long-term obligations using the GASB methodologies further attests to the District’s fiscal stability.

Planning Agenda None. 2. To assure the financial integrity of the institution and responsible use of financial resources, the financial management system has appropriate control mechanisms and widely disseminates dependable and timely information for sound financial decision making. 2.a. Financial documents, including the budget and independent audit, reflect appropriate allocation and use of financial resources to support student learning programs and services. Institutional responses to external audit findings are comprehensive, timely, and communicated appropriately.

Descriptive Summary The annual Proposed Budget and Financial Report documents the distribution of allocations within the College and the obligations for which they are used. The Strategic Plan leads the College in its decision making regarding allocation of funds. Each Fall semester, the Planning and Budget Committee focuses on planning by communicating with those responsible for the action plans of the Strategic Plan (9.16). In the Spring, the Planning and Budget Committee oversees development of the campus operating budget, which is prepared under the direction of the Vice President of 221

Administrative Services. The budget is then submitted for approval to District Fiscal Affairs and to the Board of Trustees for review and adoption (9.21). Carryover funds, which are available from concerted efforts to conserve resources, are generally used to provide a contingency fund for emergencies and address needs such as instructional equipment, one-time program expenses, tutors, safety issues, library collection updates, classroom furniture replacement, and technology upgrades (9.17). Requests for funding from carryover funds are prepared and submitted to the Planning and Budget Committee, for review and prioritization based upon goals and objectives of the Strategic Plan. Final approval is given by the President’s Advisory Cabinet. In the Strategic Plan 2004-2008, one of the completed goals was to identify, develop, and utilize student learning outcomes in the instructional areas (9.22). A completed Quality Review Report accompanies funding requests for carryover funds as part of the justification for the request. Managers and deans are asked to fill out accountability reports on the completed program or projects (9.23). Annually, the CCFS-311 Report is included with the Proposed Budget, which is made available for public inspection prior to Board approval in early September each year. After approval, it may be found on the District’s website (9.24). Fiscal management is assessed by annual external audits of the College, the District, the Cypress College Foundation, and all grant programs. When findings are presented, the District Fiscal Affairs staff works with the Vice President of Administrative Services and the appropriate dean or manager to implement procedures to resolve the issue and ensure future compliance. In the year subsequent to the year of the finding or recommendation, the auditors do a follow-up on the prior year and state whether the finding/recommendation has been implemented or not. If not implemented, the item becomes a new finding in the current year (9.25).

Self Evaluation In the last six years, audits have indicated that the financial management practices in all areas of the College are conducted with integrity and presented fairly and in conformity with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). In addition, there were no material weaknesses in internal controls identified. The 222

results of those audits are available to review in the Campus Business Office or the District Office of Fiscal Affairs, upon request, by anyone in the College community (9.26). During this time, there was one Cypress College finding that took more than one fiscal year to correct due to timing. An instructional material fee that was being charged for material was deemed not valid but was not implemented due to the timing from when the discrepancy was reported to being able to implement the correction in the Schedule of Classes for that same year (9.25).

Planning Agenda None. 2.b. Appropriate financial information is provided throughout the institution.

Descriptive Summary A presentation of the current budget status and fiscal stability of the College is part of the College’s Opening Day activities each Fall and Spring. The Vice President of Administrative Services receives ongoing information from the Community College League of California (CCLC) and the State Chancellor’s Office and shares that information at all campus meetings where deans and managers are present. Budget updates are also on the agenda at bi-monthly meetings of the Planning and Budget Committee, President’s Advisory Cabinet, District Board Meetings, and District Budget Officers Meetings. The Executive Vice President of Educational Programs and Student Services keeps the campus informed on FTES targets and costs of instructional areas. Annual financial information is included in the Outstanding Issues section of the Annual Proposed Budget Narrative, while the quarterly Chancellor’s Memo and the President’s weekly newsletter, @Cypress, contain ongoing updates throughout the fiscal year. The @Cypress newsletter is distributed to all employees, posted to the campus website, shared on Facebook and Twitter, and emailed to a group of recipients that includes retirees, employees elsewhere in the District, members of the media, Foundation Board members and other constituents. Employees are able to view adopted and adjusted budCypress College

gets, detailed expenditures, encumbrances, and balances of campus budgets utilizing the District’s enterprise business system, BANNER. This application allows monitoring and reallocation of funds within a timely manner to avoid shortfalls. Fiscal CCF-311Q reports are provided to the Board for informational purposes on a quarterly basis. All funding allocations and audit reports are on file in the Campus Business Office and District Fiscal Services Office (9.27).

Self Evaluation Information is expected to be disseminated to constituencies by representatives attending the various meetings. Minutes of campus meetings are stored on a shared network drive available to all campus employees, and Board of Trustees meeting summaries contain financial information when presented and are electronically mailed to all users of the campus’ email system. All avenues of distribution appear to be utilized for disseminating dependable and timely information.

Planning Agenda None. 2.c. The institution has sufficient cash flow and reserves to maintain stability, strategies for appropriate risk management, and realistic plans to meet financial emergencies and unforeseen occurrences.

Descriptive Summary The District maintains control of the Unrestricted General Fund and has maintained the required reserve at a prudent level and to match the requirements of the Board. These amounts are sufficient to maintain an adequate reserve for emergencies. The District receives general fund revenues through the State apportionment process. Funds are then allocated to the campuses in accordance with the District approved Budget Allocation Model. Unrestricted ending fund balances for the North Orange County Community College District, by budget center, for the previous three fiscal years is illustrated in Table 1 (9.28).

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Fiscal Year

State apportionment deferrals can pose cash flow difficulties. Due to the significant amount of apportionment deferrals to community colleges as part of the State budget package, the District has the following options in place to access cash should the need arise. The District has a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in place with California School Employees Association (CSEA) and United Faculty (UF) to borrow against the Retiree Benefits Fund, in the event of a fiscal emergency, for purposes of meeting the actual and necessary expenses of the District. In addition, the District has adopted a resolution entering into an agreement with the Orange County Treasurer to obtain a temporary transfer of funds, not exceeding 85% of anticipated revenues, to meet current expenditures (9.29). In addition to the District’s plans to meet financial emergencies, Cypress College’s Vice President of Administrative Services requests $750,000 from carryover funds each year to be marked for campus emergency/ critical needs. The Swap Meet, held at the college each weekend, generates between $1.3 and $1.4 million in income to the College each year. The College has accumulated approximately three million dollars marked for budget transition funding by not budgeting any ongoing costs to these funds. As of February 2010, the College has elected not to replace 14 vacant positions to assist with budget transition funding. The District is insured for workers compensation and property and liability claims through a combination of self-insurance and commercial insurance coverage. The excess coverage is purchased through a commercial insurance carrier (9.30). For general liability coverage, the District is self-insured and a part of a risk sharing pool, Alliance of Schools for Cooperative Insurance Programs Joint Powers of Authority (ASCIP JPA). It provides $25,000 self-insurance retention (deductible) per claim (more claims can apply if multiple parties are injured during the same incident) and the coverage is $5,000,000; excess coverage above that up to $20 million per occurrence. This amount of coverage applies to an event that caused the injury(ies)/claim(s), and the coverage is for all claims CC

SCE

District

Total

2008-09

6,583,338 8,018,211 543,706

20,297,234 35,442,489

2007-08

4,901,918 7,005,143 128,242

15,699,473 27,734,776

2006-07

4,945,541 5,739,862 (4,641)

19,125,426 29,806,188

Table 1: Unrestricted Ending Fund Balance

223

resulting from the single event/occurrence, and only a single deductible applies (9.31). For Workers Compensation, the District is self-insured for the first $500,000 for each claim, and excess coverage is purchased from a commercial insurance carrier, up to the statutory limit (9.32).

Self Evaluation Because the District has maintained a prudent level of reserve funds and monitors cash flow on a regular basis to assure that operational obligations can be met, for more than six years, no short-term financing options such as Tax Revenue Anticipation Notes (TRANS) or long-term financing options such as Certificates of Participation (COPS) have been necessary. For precautionary purposes, should the District be in need of cash to meet its current obligations, the MOU and County agreements, as discussed above, are available (9.28). The District sets aside an adequate amount of funds each year to cover its self-insurance obligations for both Workers’ Compensation and property and liability claims. The District obtains periodic actuarial evaluations on the programs used. Based on the actuarial studies, sufficient reserves are maintained in the selfinsurance fund (9.33).

Planning Agenda None. 2.d. The institution practices effective oversight of finances, including management of financial aid, grants, externally funded programs, contractual relationships, auxiliary organizations or foundations, and institutional investments and assets.

Descriptive Summary For effective oversight of finances, the College relies on procedures such as monitoring of major budgets for projected deficits, monthly reviews of auxiliary financial statements and of financial updates for grants budgets, internal auditing throughout the year, and an annual external audit. There is a consistent layering of review and approval levels between the campus and District. Purchase requisitions route electronically from the originator through appropriate management channels reaching the District Director of Purchasing for 224

final approval. Routing does not proceed without proper contractual obligations being met at specific checkpoints. Any reallocations between major expenditures over $10,000 are approved by the Board. Financial information is easily accessible with the enterprise business system so that individuals are able to monitor their own Budget Unit’s allocations and financial transactions. There are regular annual external audits as well as internal and agency audits conducted as needed. External audits include audit of categorical programs (9.34).

Self Evaluation External auditors perform tests of internal control, and those results determine how they conduct their audit. In the audit opinions of the last six years and prior, the District’s financial statements were said to be presented fairly and in conformity with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Of the 14 audit findings in the last six years, seven applied to Cypress College. One example was a finding having to do with an error in calculating the Gann limit at the District Office; another with errors in assessing the fixed assets of the North Orange County Community College District by the appraiser currently used by the District. In both cases, management response included solutions that would prevent future errors. None of the findings were deemed material weaknesses, and all recommendations of findings have been implemented (9.25).

Planning Agenda None. 2.e. All financial resources, including those from auxiliary activities, fund-raising efforts, and grants are used with integrity in a manner consistent with the mission and goals of the institution.

Descriptive Summary The College’s Associated Students (AS) (Education Code Section 76060) is funded by an optional fee of $7 per semester, including summer. This fee supports student clubs and co-curricular activities. It provides students with organizational leadership experience to promote multicultural, educational, and social opportunities; finance student activities; and facilitate particiCypress College

pation in the College community that enhances their academic experience. The AS budget is prepared by the AS Vice President of Fiscal Affairs, the AS President, and the Advisor to the AS Council. Each week the AS reconciles transactions through its own records that parallel the records maintained on their behalf by the College. Cypress College raises funds for student scholarships, student emergency assistance, faculty/staff minigrants, endowments, and other College programs. In addition, the Foundation fosters community relationships and partnerships. Cypress College is a member of ten local and/or county Chambers of Commerce, an effort that is coordinated by the Foundation. It accepts donations on behalf of the College from businesses and individuals, from private grants, and from planned gifts. The President of Cypress College is a voting member of the Foundation Board of Directors and Executive Committee. The Foundation Strategic Plan is updated during each planning cycle at an annual retreat attended by a majority of the Foundation’s Board members and is tied into the College’s mission and goals. The Bursar’s Office assists the Foundation and auditors by reconciling income to Foundation donor records, preparing a cash summary for all bank accounts, as well as a balance sheet, income sheet, and revenue and expense analysis. The Bursar also prepares monthly financial statements and investment reports for the Foundation Finance Committee, which meets monthly. The Finance Committee also reviews the annual audit. In turn, the Finance Committee reports to the full board at each regular Board of Directors meeting. The Board of Directors reviews all of the Foundation’s activities (9.35). The Foundation is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization with a separate Tax I.D. (#12-7197703) although in several respects it functions as part of the College. For example, Foundation staff are District Employees, and the Foundation Executive Director reports to the College President. The Foundation undergoes an annual external audit process that is separate from the NOCCCD audit. The Foundation Finance Committee, which meets monthly, oversees this process by providing direction to the audit, and in turn, reports to the Foundation Board of Directors, which meets bimonthly. There have been no adverse audit findings for the Foundation in the past ten years. Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

The Bookstore moved into a new facility in May 2008, which includes an adjacent Bookstore Express area that offers snacks and drinks. Over the last two years, the campus’ self-operated Bookstore has been hit hard by rapidly reducing book sales as the demand for print materials has begun to shift to other modes of delivery. In 2009-2010, overall book sales dropped $533,863 from the prior year in spite of record enrollments at the College. Sales in the Summer and Fall semesters of 2010-2011 also reflect a gradual decline as students search out the many alternates to the purchase of hard-copy textbooks. To meet the changing demands, in Summer 2010 the Bookstore entered into a textbook rental contract with Follett and a contract with CourseSmart, which offers e-books for sale. Both services offer much less expensive alternatives to students than the traditional hard-copy textbook. Unfortunately, neither option has the revenue potential to support the overhead of the Bookstore in delivery of textbooks and supplies. To date, the decline in book sales has been mostly offset by revenue generated in the Bookstore Express and the gradual downsizing of full-time staff with two positions eliminated subsequent to staff retirements. The Bookstore operation is being monitored closely, hours modified, and new revenue sources sought while staff assess how the store might evolve in the future. Cypress College out sources the Food Service operations. The current food services contract with Sodexo expires in June 2011, and a Request for Proposals will be issued in Spring 2011 as the College considers who will manage the operation over the next five years. In 2008-2009, the Cypress College Foundation experienced significant investment losses, as did many similar organizations. Investments fell 16.6%, from $1,109,500 to $925,836 during this period. This — coupled with investment losses in the final quarter of 2007-2008 and the recessionary economic environment — put the Foundation’s unrestricted funds into a deficit. However, from April 2009 to March 2010, investments rebounded, increasing by 32% in this 12-month period. As of March 31, 2010, the Cypress College Foundation’s total assets were $1,635,851, an all-time high. Cypress College administers several grants. As of February 2010, grants include: Captioning Grant — assist instructors in getting DVDs/videos closed captioned ($150,000 or more 225

over 2 years).

gram ($5,500 annually).

Edustream Grant — Provides off-site storage of online media content and a library of over 2500 closed-captioned videos for faculty use in instruction ($100,000 annually for 5 years).

HSRA Health Science Grant — Provides direct scholarship awards to HS students ($100,000 annually).

Perkins IV — Supports a variety of CTE programs/ projects ($857,000 annually for 5 years). CCRAA STEM — Supports a variety of projects/ equipment purchases and summer Bridge Program ($1,250,000 annually for 2 years). Tech Prep Grant — Supports a variety of CTE outreach/articulation and other projects ($76,000 annually for 5 years). AARA DHHS HIT Grant — Supports curriculum revisions and program expansion for HIT professionals ($700,896 over 2 years). WIA Grant — Supports program expansion of Allied Health Programs ($776,000 over 4 years). Nursing Enrollment Growth and Retention — Supports an increase in the number of Nursing students accepted into the program ($300,000 annually). Psych Tech Apprentice Grant — Supports an increase in the number of Psych Tech students accepted in the program ($221,000 over 2 years). UniHealth Foundation Grant — Addresses the nursing shortage at St Mary’s Hospital in Long Beach and COPE Health Solutions ($150,000 over 2 years). ATTE Grant — EWD grant supporting curriculum development and industry training in emerging technologies ($220,000 annually for 5 years). Title V Grant — Developing Hispanic-Serving Institutions Grant ($650,000 annually for 5 years). CTE Teachers Prep Grant — Supports the development of CTE teachers ($190,000 for 1 year). NOCROP Partnership Academy Grant — High School Medical Academy partnership ($10,000+/-). Tech Prep Cooperative Grant (HS) — Supports CTE programs, curriculum development, articulation, outreach ($20,000 annually for 5 years). Basic Skills Initiative — Improvement of Basic Skills ($128,000 varies annually from $100,000 to $180,000).

Multimedia Grant — Provides support to ACG and other MM programs ($10,000+/- annually). All grants are governed under Board and Administrative Policy BP/AP 3280 and the Education Code, Section 70902. The Dean of Career Technical Education and Economic Development maintains primary oversight over all grants. For each grant, this office sets up an accounting system at the campus level, which is checked monthly against, and independently from, District financial reports. Prior to their approval, grant purchases are checked for consistency with the particular grant work plan. On larger grants, the College hires a third-party consultant for additional guidance on achieving grant goals and preparing for audits. Select grants associated with specific departments (e.g., within Health Science) rely on that division dean as the first level of oversight. The second level of oversight is provided by the Dean of Career Technical Education and Economic Development, and a third level of monitoring is carried out by the District’s Finance Office. Grant reports are provided either quarterly or semiannually to the appropriate funder’s governing body. Midterm and final report outcomes, including complete budget information, are shared with the appropriate constituencies.

Self Evaluation The financial resources including those from auxiliary activities, fund-raising efforts, and grants are used with integrity in a manner consistent with the mission and goals of the College. This is documented in audit reports as well as the internal reports presented to the Board.

Planning Agenda None. 2.f. Contractual agreements with external entities are consistent with the mission and goals of the institution, governed by institutional policies, and contain appropriate provisions to maintain the integrity of the institution.

Hilgenfeld Grant — Supports Mortuary Science Pro226

Cypress College

Descriptive Summary The Board delegates to the Vice Chancellor of Finance and Facilities the authority to supervise the general business procedures of the District to assure the proper administration of property and contracts per Education Code Section 70902(d); 81655, 81656. The Board delegates to the Vice Chancellor of Finance and Facilities, or District Director of Purchasing, the authority to enter into contracts on behalf of the District and to establish administrative procedures for contract awards and management. The Vice Chancellor of Finance and Facilities establishes procedures regarding the use of College property, including but not limited to facilities, equipment, and supplies, by community groups and other outside contractors. These administrative procedures reflect the requirements of applicable law, including Education Code Section 82537, regarding Civic Centers. All District properties are subject to a facility use charge in accordance with Education Code Section 82545 (bf). This ensures the highest level of protection for the District and the least amount of exposure for liability or financial issues. Under the guidelines provided by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), the NOCCCD has developed a threestage process to be completed before an independent contractor is engaged. The questionnaire is completed by a representative from the division requesting the services and reviewed by the dean/director or a designee. The risk for engaging independent contractors is evaluated by a designated individual for each college and the District. The risk evaluators are: Cypress College – Vice President of Administrative Services; Fullerton College – Director, Budget and Finance; School of Continuing Education – Manager, Administrative Services; and District – Purchasing Director. Contracts up to $5,000 are approved by the Budget Officer or College President/Provost. For services or work to be done costing less than $25,000, the Chancellor, Vice Chancellor of Finance and Facilities, or the Director of Purchasing may approve. Any agreement above this threshold requires NOCCCD Board of Trustees approval (9.36). Contract language is drafted with the intent to develop fair contracts that would allow each party to function at the highest level, while always taking into consideration the regulations and policies that Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

govern the College. “Out” clauses are included in every contract for any breach, for cause, and for no cause.

Self Evaluation The District negotiates contractual agreements with external entities that are consistent with its mission and goals, governed by institutional policies, and that contain appropriate provisions to maintain the integrity of the institution with evaluation and review by legal counsel, as appropriate, and final approval by the Board.

Planning Agenda None. 2.g. The institution regularly evaluates its financial management processes, and the results of the evaluation are used to improve financial management systems.

Descriptive Summary The campus Bursar’s Office maintains the books and records for Bursar Office activities, the Associated Students, other trust and agency funds, and the enterprise activities on campus such as the Bookstore and Food Services operations. In addition, it maintains trust accounts for various student and department activities (9.37). All cash disbursements are approved by a minimum of two authorized individuals and supported by adequate documentation. Purchases are made in accordance with the guidelines established (9.44). The campus Bursar’s Office submits to the District a quarterly investment report of all campus investment funds maintained by the Bursar’s Office. These reports are then incorporated into the quarterly financial reports provided to the Board. The Board of Trustees provides an annual audit of all funds, books, and accounts under the control and jurisdiction of the District in accordance with the regulations of the Board of Governors. Arrangements for the audit for any fiscal year are made final no later than May 1 of the preceding fiscal year. The annual audits are made by Certified Public Accountants licensed by the California Board of Accountancy and contain the identification of expenditures by source of fund; a statement that the audit was conducted pursuant to standards and procedures developed in accordance 227

with Education Code Section 84040.5; and a summary of audit exceptions and management recommendations. The Board of Trustees then reviews the annual audit at a public meeting of the Board (9.38). The Budget Process Committee has been meeting for the past ten years. The committee consists of members from Cypress College, Fullerton College, and the School of Continuing Education. It meets every second and the fourth Tuesday afternoon throughout the year. The purpose of this committee is to discuss different issues concerning the College or the District. The Vice Chancellor is accessible and open for any dialogues or discussions on any financial matter. The rate of pay for each employee of the District is in accordance with the rate established for the position on the appropriate salary schedule as approved by the Board of Trustees, unless the employee’s compensation is otherwise fixed by the Board. Payment to employees is in accordance with the schedule and procedures for school payrolls established by the Orange County Department of Education. Any payroll error resulting in insufficient payment for an employee is corrected, and a supplemental check is issued within a reasonable time after the employee provides notice to the District Payroll Office. If an overpayment occurs, the Payroll Office will notify the employee. Normally, salary deductions for overpayment commence with the next month’s paycheck, and the overpayment is deducted in the same number of paychecks in which the overpayment occurred, except when the period of overpayment exceeds one year. In that situation, the period over which deductions are made shall not exceed a period of one year (9.39). Other effective vehicles for financial oversight are internal audit projects, such as the District’s cash handling review. NOCCCD established a position several years ago to be responsible for this area. This part-time position, Special Projects Manager, reports directly to the Vice Chancellor of Finance and Facilities. The risk assessments done by this Special Projects Manager are summarized in several internal reports. These are not public documents, nor are they available on the College’s J: drive. However, the reports are available through the Vice Chancellor’s Office.

Self Evaluation The District regularly evaluates its financial manage228

ment processes with the goal of providing feedback that can be used to improve financial management systems. Training on financial management systems enhances the usefulness of management reporting. Also, the District’s external and internal auditors are regularly involved in reviewing processes and procedures, especially with new or developing programs. Past fiscal planning is a good template for the future and provides a framework for procedures and controls. The District encourages those who have fiscal oversight for an area to take a direct role in ensuring future compliance. Fiscal needs are evaluated as planning is done and brought forward as part of the budget process. If resources are not immediately available or if the need can be deferred without consequence to a subsequent budget period, documentation to this effect is made so that the funding can be established at an appropriate time.

Planning Agenda None. 3. The institution systematically assesses the effective use of financial resources and uses the results of the evaluation as the basis for improvement.

Descriptive Summary The District has an established Board and Administrative Policy BP/AP 2430 prescribing the delegation of authority to the Chancellor. Also, BP/AP 6100 designate authority to the Vice Chancellor, Finance and Facilities, over general business procedures of the District to ensure proper administration (9.41). Additionally, a Functional Map is being formulated to delineate District-wide functions and responsibilities of Administrative Services, Instructional Services, Student Services, and Facilities and Infrastructure. This Functional Map will be presented to the District Planning Council (DPC) for review. Once DPC has the opportunity to review the Functional Map, appropriate steps will be taken to have this reviewed and approved by the Board of Trustees. From a financial perspective, there are various mechanisms in place to assess the effectiveness of services provided District wide. Financial records are subject to periodic internal review and an annual external audit. Cypress College

Various categorical programs are also subject to review/audit by the funding agency. Committees such as DPC and the Budget Officers Group meet regularly to discuss and assess financial practices and procedures of the District. Additionally, frequent feedback is received from outside vendors, contracting agencies, and other educational institutions regarding the effectiveness of District practices. Also, employee evaluation instruments are an essential tool utilized by the District to assess the effectiveness of services. The District’s current budget allocation model and decentralized operational model provide operational budgets to each of the campuses to address their individual needs and priorities. The District has semi-monthly meetings with the budget officers from each campus where there is an opportunity to voice campus concerns. In addition, comprehensive evaluation instruments of District managers are sent to many people on the campuses as another opportunity to provide feedback to the District. And lastly, every District agenda item submitted under the current Board Agenda format clearly identifies how the District operations are aligned with the Districtwide Strategic Plan, which encompasses each institution’s mission and function. The District’s budget allocation model includes the budget centers Cypress College, Fullerton College, School of Continuing Education, Information Services, and District operations. It encompasses the following budget categories: Personnel costs of all permanent positions; Operating Allocation costs; Extended Day budgets; District-wide expenses; Self-supported Programs, Contracts, Grants, Restricted Programs, and Other Funds; and Carryover Funds. In addition, a 5% reserve for economic uncertainty is maintained in accordance with the California Community College State Chancellor’s Office recommended guidelines as a “prudent” reserve level. The District primarily receives resources from the State based on FTES and, therefore, FTES is the primary driver of the District’s budget allocation model. Institutions’ FTES targets are established based on a shared-participation process that includes discussions at various forums where Campus and District personnel evaluate the resources available to generate FTES and the campuses’ ability to generate FTES targets based on institutional priorities. The District’s budgeting process is decentralized once Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

the resources are allocated to the institutions in accordance with the budget allocation model. Therefore, with the exception of personnel costs for all permanent positions, use of the allocated resources is left to the institution’s internal budgeting process, using a sharedgovernance approach to address the needs and priorities of the institution. The District’s budget allocation model allocates resources based on one measurement focus, which is the measurement of students served. Several years ago, the District did a thorough analysis of the budget “split” using other points of measurement such as number of personnel and gross square footage. That analysis, which was in response to an accreditation recommendation, did not present any significant concerns that the method of distributing resources was inequitable (9.40). The resource distribution method is data driven. To name a few examples, distribution based on FTES is from data compiled by the campuses from the information contained within the District’s enrollment; carryover analysis is based on information contained within the District’s general ledger system; personnel costs, which comprise over 80% of the on-going expenditures, are based on information contained within the District’s human resource system. In addition, each campus has its own researcher to provide evidence based on data gathered from various sources. As mentioned above, the District’s budgeting process is decentralized once the resources are allocated to the institutions in accordance with the budget allocation model. Therefore, with the exception of personnel costs for all permanent positions, use of the allocated resources is left to the institution’s internal budgeting process using a shared-governance approach to address the needs and priorities of the institution. The District and College’s expenditures are controlled via an electronic approval queue process that routes all expenditure requisitions, transfers, etc., to the proper approvers. This approval routing system is very extensive and incorporates adequate layers to provide checks and balances through many campus levels prior to moving to the final District-level approval. Once at the District level, the District Manager of Fiscal Affairs, or designee, reviews every item for compliance with various laws and regulations under which the District is governed. The District has practiced sound, prudent, fiscal management for many years. This is evidenced by the positive results of the external Financial and 229

Compliance annual audits. The District has not received any audit adjustments, nor has the District had any material weaknesses reported over any areas for at least the past six years. Additionally, any deficiencies noted through the audit process are taken seriously by the District, and appropriate steps are taken to ensure that the deficiencies are addressed, which is also evidenced in the results of subsequent audits as the “status of prior year findings.” Following is a brief summary of finding topics for the previous six fiscal years: 2009 — There were two deficiencies noted in the areas of 1) Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment, and 2) Student Financial Aid Return of Title IV Funds (Note: the District has implemented procedures to correct these deficiencies and expects that the 2010 audit will confirm this.) 2008 — The District did not receive any findings. 2007 — There were five deficiencies noted in the areas of 1) Student Health Fees, 2) Lottery Funds, 3) Instructional Material Fees, 4) Course Repetition, and 5) CalWorks (Note: These comments were reported as “implemented” in the subsequent fiscal year audit.) 2006 — There were two deficiencies noted, both in the area of Instructional Material Fees (Note: One of these comments was reported as “implemented” in the subsequent fiscal year audit while the other comment was reported as “implemented” in the 2008 audit.) 2005 — There were three deficiencies noted in the areas of 1) Student Financial Aid Return of Title IV Funds, 2) Student Financial Aid Pell Grant Origination Records, and 3) EOPS Advisory Committee (Note: These comments were reported as “implemented” in the subsequent fiscal year audit.) 2004 — There were two deficiencies noted in the areas of 1) Student Financial Aid Return of Title IV Funds, 2) Concurrent Enrollment (Note: The comment related to Concurrent Enrollment was reported as “implemented” in the subsequent fiscal year audit while the Student Financial Aid Return of Title IV Funds was reported as “implemented” in the 2006 audit.) The District consistently ends the fiscal year with a positive ending balance. Following is the General Fund ending fund balance for the last six years: 2009 – $38,387,687 230

2008 – $30,468,702 2007 – $32,400,251 2006 – $33,879,585 2005 – $30,247,716 2004 – $32,138,768 For at least the past six fiscal years, the District has received an unqualified opinion on its external financial and compliance audits. This is the highest level opinion of audit assurance possible. This evidences the sound fiscal practices and strong internal controls that are in place throughout the District. In addition, the unqualified opinions reveal that the District is in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations, including the California Community College State Chancellor’s Office Budget and Accounting Manual and all applicable Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) statements. The evidence supporting the Chancellor’s delegation of full responsibility/authority to the Presidents and other appropriate administrators at Cypress College to implement and administer policies without interference and holds them accountable for the College operations is found in Board Policy and Administrative Procedure BP/AP 6100, which states that authority is delegated to various positions throughout the District, including the College Presidents. In addition, through weekly Chancellor’s Staff meetings, the College Presidents meet with the Chancellor to discuss various updates and make decisions on certain matters through a collaborative process. Furthermore, the majority of campus operations are decentralized and thus fall under the responsibility and authority of the College President. Methods of the College and District working jointly come in many forms including informal communication by telephone, email, fax, and/or inter-office mail. This allows for a quick flow of information. From a fiscal standpoint, the District fiscal staff and the campus fiscal staff work well together and have open lines of communication. Additionally, semi-monthly Budget Officer meetings and DPC meetings provide a faceto-face atmosphere to communicate with one another. These methods allow for a shared perspective of College as well as District matters. The Colleges are well-informed about financial isCypress College

sues and Board actions that have an impact on their operations, educational quality, stability, or ability to provide quality education. As previously mentioned, weekly Chancellor’s Staff meetings and semi-monthly DPC and Budget Officer meetings provide a formal mechanism to keep the colleges well-informed on various financial issues. In addition, any issues that need attention prior to the next scheduled meeting are communicated to the campuses. In regard to Board actions, all of the Board agenda items are available for review and comment via monthly DAC meetings. For non-business meetings (the second Board meeting of each month), the Board agenda items are available for review and comment at Chancellor’s Staff. In addition, all Board agendas and minutes are posted on the District’s website, available to the public (9.42). The District can evaluate the effectiveness of its financial practices through several instruments. As mentioned above, the District’s financial records are subject to periodic internal review/audit, and annual external audits, both of which provide qualitative and quantitative data assessment. Additionally, various monthly, quarterly, bi-annual, and annual reports are completed accurately and timely. There have been no material weaknesses identified on audits or reviews performed on any of the District’s categorical programs, or on the District financial records as a whole. Financial audits are conducted on a regular basis, both internally and externally. The results of the periodic internal reviews/audits are shared frequently with members of the Budget Officers Group. Annual external audit results are also presented to, and accepted by, the Board of Trustees, and subsequently filed with the State Chancellor’s Office and various regulatory agencies.

SELF- EVALUATION Fiscal resources are reviewed regularly and results of those reviews are used to make improvements.

Planning Agenda None. Reference Documents 9.1 Educational Master Plan, Page 10 Diagram — www. cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

pdocuments.aspx 9.2 CC Department Planning and Program Review Form, CC Student Support Services Quality Review Report, CC Campus Support Services Quality Review Report — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/ InstitutionalResearch/ProgramReview 9.3 Documents for 2010-2011 One Time Funding Requests — J:\Planning & Budget Committee 9.4 Cypress College Budget Units for 2009-20109.5 Planning and Budget Safety Review Form — J:\ Planning & Budget Committee 9.6 NOCCCD/Cypress College Budget Process Flow Chart 9.7

Perkins Grant Team meeting minutes

9.8 Minutes of meetings from PBC, PAC, Evaluation Forms — J:\Planning & Budget Committee and J:\ President’s Advisory Cabinet 9.9 Budget and Audit Reports — www.nocccd.edu/Departments/FandF/FinanceFacilities.htm 9.10

Five Year Construction Plan

9.11 Educational Master Plan — www.cypresscollege. edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 9.12 Student Services Master Plan — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments. aspx 9.13 Strategic Plan — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/ InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 9.14 NOCCCD Board Agenda, Quarterly Financial Status Reports — www.nocccd.edu/Departments/FandF/ FinanceFacilities.htm 9.15 Cypress College Shared Governance Process Committees and Task Forces, President’s Advisory Cabinet February 1, 2007, Cypress College President’s Advisory Cabinet Description, Purpose & Guidelines, September 2008, Cypress College Planning and Budget Committee, September 5, 2008 — J:\ Planning & Budget Committee and J:\President’s Advisory Cabinet 9.16 Proposed Budget and Financial Report 2009-2010, Page 31 9.17 NOCCCD Annual Financial Report 6/30/09, p. 16) (graphs p. 12 -13) — www.nocccd.edu/Departments/FandF/FinanceFacilities.htm 9.18 NOCCCD Annual Financial Report 6/30/09, p. 5-6) (include SNA stmt, p.7-9) — www.nocccd.edu/Departments/FandF/FinanceFacilities.htm9.19 Proposed Budget and Financial Report 2009-2010 P.4

231

& 29

htm#HumanResources

9.20 Proposed Budget and Financial Report 2009-2010, p 11

9.40 DPC Meeting Minutes — J:\Chancellor’s Cabinet District Planning Council Summaries-Minutes

9.21 Budget Preparation, Board Policy 6200 — www. nocccd.edu/Policies/PoliciesAndProcedures.htm

9.41 North Orange County Community College Board Policies and Administrative Procedures — www. nocccd.edu/Policies/PoliciesAndProcedures. htm#BoardPolicies

9.22 Strategic Plan 2004-2008 — www.cypresscollege. edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 9.23 Annual Proposed Budget Narrative 2009/10, page 18; Strategic Plan 2008-2011, p.6-7; Educational Master Plan 2006-2016, p.7 9.24

Annual Proposed Budget Narrative 2009/10, p.54

9.25 Phone interview with Claudette Dain, District Director of Fiscal Services, 12/18/09 9.26

Annual Financial Reports, 2007, 2008

9.27 Chancellor’s Memos Feb 2009-Feb 2010, Planning and Budget Committee Guidelines, @Cypress Newsletters 8/21/09, 9/18/09, 1/29/10

9.42 NOCCCD Agenda and Minutes — www.nocccd. edu/Trustees/MtgMinutesArchive2010.htm 9.43 Department of Finance and Facilities — www. nocccd.edu/Departments/FandF/FinanceFacilities. htm 9.44 Department of Finance and Facilities, Purchasing — www.nocccd.edu/Departments/FandF/Purchasing. htm 9.45 Department of Finance and Facilities Progress Report — www.nocccd.edu/Departments/FandF/ FacilitiesBond/documents/NOCCCDFMPProgressReport2009.pdf

9.28 Claudette Dain email 10/29/09, Audit Reports under Analysis of Ending Fund Balance 9.29 Claudette Dain, District Director of Fiscal Services, email 10/29/09; 11/24/09 Board Meeting Minutes, Item 4.a; News from the Board 11/24/09 9.30 Claudette Dain, District Director of Fiscal Services, email 10/29/09; Board Meeting Minutes 6-9-09 for 2009-2010 school year, item 3.e & f 9.31

T. Oh, District Director of Risk Services, 2/11/10

9.32

T. Oh, District Director of Risk Services, 12/16/09

9.33

T. Oh, District Director of Risk Services, 12/14/09

9.34 External Audits — www.nocccd.edu/Departments/ FandF/FinanceFacilities.htm, internal audits performed by Pete Cruz under the direction of Vice Chancellor Finance & Facilities, periodic compliance reviews from state agencies remain with the program/department reviewed 9.35

Foundation Meeting Minutes

9.36 Administrative Procedure 6150 — www.nocccd. edu/Policies/PoliciesAndProcedures.htm 9.37 Ref. Education Code Section 84040(c); Title 5, Section 58311; Accreditation Standard 9B and C 9.38 Board Policy/Administrative Procedure 6400 — www.nocccd.edu/Policies/PDFs/6400.AP_022206. pdf 9.39 Board Policy/Administrative Procedure 7130 — www.nocccd.edu/Policies/PoliciesAndProcedures.

232

Cypress College

Standard IV Leadership and Governance

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

233

Standard IVA: DecisionMaking Roles and Processes A. Decision-Making Roles and Processes The institution recognizes that ethical and effective leadership through the organization enables the institution to identify institutional values, set and achieve goals, learns, and improves. Cypress College’s leadership and governance reflects a student-centered philosophy with the primary emphasis on student learning outcomes and success. The decision-making roles and processes, therefore, focus on improving the learning environment on campus to accommodate the needs and interests of the students. By integrating the systematic governing structure that involves campus members in strategic planning — staff, faculty, administrators, and students — the College encourages open communication for new ideas while maintaining the integrity of the College’s mission, values, and vision. 1. Institutional leaders create an environment for empowerment, innovation, and institutional excellence. They encourage staff, faculty, administrators, and students, no matter what their official titles, to take initiative in improving the practices, programs and services in which they are involved. When ideas for improvement have policy or significant institution-wide implications, systematic participative processes are used to assure effective discussion, planning and implementation.

Descriptive Summary The vision for Cypress College is “A premier learning community recognized for supporting student success and enriching society.” This vision reveals student success to be at the core of all institutional efforts at Cypress College (10.1,10.5). The word “premier” reflects the focus on excellence in achieving student success. The most all-encompassing document that points towards the importance of enhancing student success is the Strategic Plan (10.2). The four Core Values — Excellence, Integrity, Collegiality, and Inclusiveness — speak to the campus culture of shared governance with student success as the ultimate goal (10.5). Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

The Directions in the Strategic Plan refine and guide the College toward continued student success and learning. The Plan is the primary tool used by decisionmakers on campus and is the foundation for institutional planning and budgetary determinations (10.5). Monetary requests that are in close harmony with the directions of the Strategic Plan are more likely to be funded (10.2). Student success is monitored as part of program review for both instructional programs and support services. To this end, the College is nearing completion on its plan for integrating student learning outcomes (SLOs) and assessments into its ongoing quality review process (10.7). The program review process allows the faculty and classified staff in each area to contribute their insights to the program evaluation. Since these reviews serve as the basis for long-term planning, employees also have a say in determining the direction of their programs. The culture of the institution reflects excellence in its ability to live up to the core value of inclusiveness through the many efforts the College utilizes to provide opportunities for all segments of the institution to be involved with planning. Planning retreats are held, requests for participation are sent to the entire campus community, and the conveners always ensure that there are representatives from faculty, classified, management, and student constituencies. Sometimes representatives of the surrounding communities are also included. The most recent planning retreat in Spring 2008 involved 50 members from the Cypress College community who attended a strategic planning colloquium. The participants included all segments of the campus from students, to faculty, managers, and classified staff as well as the Cypress College Foundation board of directors and other community partners. Some had been at the campus for many years, while others were new (10.5).

Self Evaluation The Fall 2009 Campus Climate Survey revealed that overall Cypress College faculty and staff members viewed the campus atmosphere favorably (10.3). A majority (over 60%) (10.3b) of Cypress College employees who responded assigned positive ratings on all eleven descriptors. In fact, over 80% agreed that the campus was “friendly, respectful and comfortable.” This result 235

was considerably higher than it had been in 2008 when the satisfaction in those areas was closer to 70%. It is interesting to note that in all remaining descriptive areas except “relaxed” (61.6%), respondents rated the atmosphere at Cypress College at or above the 70% level. This result is ten percentage points above the last climate survey from 2008. This increase in faculty and staff satisfaction is noteworthy as California has been faced with the worst economic conditions in decades. Cypress College has suffered budgetary cutbacks, overcrowding in classrooms, and reductions in staff, and yet satisfaction with the campus climate is higher than in the past. Administrators and managers perceived the atmosphere on campus more favorably than other employee groups. Administrators, full-time faculty members, and members of shared-governance committees are more satisfied with their work at Cypress College and believe that their contributions are more influential than staff, part-time faculty, and those not involved in shared-governance committees. Administrators were also most likely to agree that they are aware and involved in campus planning while part-time faculty were least likely to agree. The 2009 Climate Survey trends show that overall the College atmosphere, acceptance of diversity and decision-making, and job satisfaction are rated more positively than in the past (10.3). Although most employees of Cypress College hold positive attitudes and beliefs about the College, all employees do not experience the campus as positively as others. Employees who are members of dominant social groups (e.g., Whites, men, heterosexuals, and nondisabled individuals) experience the College as more supportive and equitable than do employees who are members of minority social groups. Similarly, experiences of administrators are more positive, and they feel that their involvement in campus planning and decision making is more meaningful than faculty (part-time or full-time) or staff (10.3). With excellence as a goal, improving student learning is also the primary outcome of the Department Planning and Program Review (previously known as Instructional Quality Assessment) and the Student Services Quality Review processes. These committees utilize the decision-making processes to assess and evaluate where the campus is succeeding and which areas need improvement in both the instructional and 236

student support areas. Past results have included curriculum and budget revisions that focus on improving student learning and an increase in grant applications that are designed to enhance the College’s ability to provide support services for its students. The College’s current self evaluation processes are relying upon the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges’ (ACCJC) revised accreditation standards that went into effect in 2004. These standards stated in part, “…The institution provides the means for students to learn, assesses how well learning is occurring, and strives to improve that learning through ongoing, systematic, and integrated planning” (Standard I,10.2). Instructional programs, student support services, and library and learning support services evaluate their effectiveness in supporting these goals through the program review process. The results of these evaluations are published in the annual Institutional Effectiveness Report. At this point, program learning outcomes have been developed for all academic programs and support service areas (10.7b). Most academic departments have completed their first cycle of assessment and will be linking these assessments into their planning documents and program review through the TracDat software in the next evaluation cycle (10.7). Some programs (e.g., the Supplemental Instruction Program) also conduct detailed analyses with the assistance of the Office of Institutional Research and Planning. The results of these studies are posted on the office’s web page (10.7c) as well as in other College documents. In addition to its role in evaluating practices within its programs and services, the SLO process has involved many campus personnel in meaningful dialogue. It has increased faculty and staff awareness of their roles in helping achieve institutional goals. Faculty play the key role in determining the content and delivery of student learning with input from this ongoing dialogue as well as assessment and curricular program and professional development activities. Staff members who are directly involved with campus and district committees — those involved with funding, campus activities, and events — perhaps can even more readily describe their own roles than those who are not as involved. The College recognizes the importance of continually keeping the various constituency groups aware of their roles and opportunities for involvement in governance structures (10.5). Cypress College

There are many opportunities for innovation on the part of the faculty both as individuals and as members of departments. They create and modify existing curriculum on a five-year cycle to maintain currency and compliance with the CSU and UC articulation agreements. Either by working independently or with the assistance of the Expanded SLO Committee, faculty members develop SLOs for individual courses as well as PLOs that evaluate their ability to serve students effectively. Based on the results from SLO analysis and other input, faculty evaluate their departmental planning goals and recommend changes to bring these goals into alignment with action plans identified in the master planning documents. These evaluations provide input to the annual budget development process through department participation and one time funding requests. They also assist the division deans in prioritizing proposals for hiring additional faculty (10.5). Through the negotiated language of faculty and classified contracts, the District administration encourage faculty and classified employees to participate in the numerous colloquia, strategic conversations, and strategic planning gatherings. Students are encouraged to participate through their involvement in club activities and student government. The structure of these events encourages individuals to express their opinions and share their ideas. In addition, there are important workplace structures which rely upon the governance process to enhance student learning. They include departments, divisions, and offices where individual and group ideas may be heard. Finally, there are campus committees, governance structures such as the Academic Senate and Faculty and Classified Employees’ unions, and the Associated Students, which can serve as vehicles for innovation and improvement (10.5).

Planning Agenda None. 2. The institution establishes and implements a written policy providing for faculty, staff, administrator, and student participation in decision-making processes. The policy specifies the manner in which individuals bring forward ideas from their constituencies and work together on appropriate policy, planning, and special-purposes bodies. 2.a. Faculty and administrators have a subInstitutional Self Study — Spring 2011

stantive and clearly defined role in institutional governance and exercise a substantial voice in institutional policies, planning, and budget that relate to their areas of responsibility and expertise. Students and staff also have established mechanism or organizations for providing input into institutional decisions.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College has developed both formal and informal avenues of communication consistent with its core values of inclusiveness and collegiality. These communication networks allow for both top-down and bottom-up communication that encourage efficiency and creativity within the community so that each member has the opportunity to suggest ideas for institutional improvements. As part of the North Orange County Community College District (NOCCCD), communication between Cypress College, Fullerton College, the School of Continuing Education, and the District Office must also be coordinated effectively. Formal structures within the District as well as all Board policies can be found on the NOCCCD website (10.10) For example, Board Policy 2510 specifies the role of faculty, staff, and students in institutional governance. Descriptions of College-level communication structures can be found in both the College’s Strategic Plan (10.2) and the Educational Master Plan (10.5). Specific details about the membership, history, and purpose of the various governance and planning committees are stored on the College’s J: drive (10.11). Individual faculty members have many avenues through which to communicate ideas and participate in the governance process. Regular (monthly or as needed) department and division meetings allow faculty to express concerns, contribute ideas, and participate in the day-to-day operations within their department. At these meetings, department coordinators share information and provide status reports on their areas. Faculty members on shared-governance committees and Academic Senate representatives inform their peers about the deliberative activities of these groups (10.12). In turn, faculty discuss these activities and, when appropriate, vote to establish directives for their representatives. The Academic Senate represents faculty on all issues regarding classroom instruction and College policy. 237

Faculty can bring division-specific issues to the Academic Senate through their elected representatives. In addition, faculty can address areas of wider concern through their at-large Academic Senate representatives (10.13). When necessary, issues related to instructional assignment or terms of employment can be addressed through the United Faculty union (UF) for full-time faculty or Adjunct Faculty United (AdFAC) for adjunct instructors. Both of these unions operate under their own set of governance rules (10.14). Classified staff participate in division meetings where they can express their concerns and provide feedback to the faculty. Most divisions also hold regular staff meetings where classified personnel can communicate directly with their manager to establish operating procedures for their area and help develop the division budget. Much of the operational information affecting day-to-day processes are communicated informally through the network of division office managers (10.12). Their ability to communicate effectively and their willingness to work together is one of the College’s strengths. Like faculty, classified staff can communicate workplace-related concerns through their California School Employees Association (CSEA) when necessary (10.15). Cypress College administration communicates via a regularly scheduled series of meetings. Deans from Academic Divisions and Student Support Services meet twice monthly with the Executive Vice President of Instruction to share the concerns of their faculty and staff and to discuss issues that affect instruction and student support. At a separate meeting chaired by the President, Deans and Directors discuss broader campus issues including facilities concerns and the development of campus-wide procedures. These directors’ meetings are scheduled to alternate with a larger Management Team meeting that includes all administrative personnel (10.16). In addition to these administrative meetings, managers are also members of one or more other committees where they serve side-by-side with faculty and staff (10.17). Student representation occurs through the Associated Students Council, which makes appointments and provides feedback to campus committees. Over the past two years, student participation on the Council has increased, enabling stronger and more diverse student representation in the shared-governance process. In 238

addition to input through the formal process, students at the College are able to promote change through less formal processes by working directly with faculty, managers, and administrators (10.18). Most decisions that affect Cypress College are made at the campus level. These decisions may involve budgetary, staffing, and instructional issues as well as the development of policies and procedures. Typically, planning begins at the department and division level as part of the program review process (10.19). This planning document aligns departmental goals with the institution’s goals as outlined in the Strategic Plan and Educational Master Plan (EMP), taking into account the data collected through the SLO process (10.19), the Institutional Effectiveness Report (10.7), and other research projects requested through the Office of Instruction. When instructors determine that additional resources are needed to fulfill their goals, they submit a OneTime Funding Proposal to the appropriate direction committee (10.2). The various direction committees prioritize these proposals and make recommendations to the Planning and Budget Committee (PBC). The PBC reviews these proposals, evaluates the campus needs and resources, and passes their recommendation on to the President’s Advisory Cabinet for final approval. Occasionally, decisions affecting the campus occur via a top-down mechanism. These decisions begin as directives from the president, often as a result of changing regulations or accreditation standards. In these situations, information regarding campus goals — including the rationale behind them and the parameters for resolving the issues — are communicated in a variety of venues. These discussions occur at large gatherings such as campus Opening Day events, Leadership Team meetings, as well as through management and division meetings. As much as possible, the campus community works together to craft an appropriate response.

Self Evaluation Although Cypress College has developed a structured decision-making process that encourages open communication and innovation, the number of individuals who participate in this process is less than optimal. Those individuals that do participate express a greater sense of satisfaction both with the College and with Cypress College

their job (10.3). The two most common excuses for lack of involvement are a lack of available time and inadequate information on how to get involved. New personnel and those that do not have a history of involvement are often unaware of campus processes and procedures. This problem creates an information gap forming a barrier for recruitment into the sharedgovernance process. For example, many instructors are not familiar with the valuable information available on the campus J: drive, while others do not know how to access it or that it even exists. These obstacles prevent them from becoming involved in campus governance. Cypress College’s plans to improve involvement include creating a brochure “How to Get Involved” (10.25); however, barriers to participations still remain. The fact that many individuals are not involved has serious consequences in terms of both communication and governance. Increasing participation will require an extensive effort of analysis, recruitment, and retentions. Staff Development introduces first year full-time faculty members to the structure and function of college governance in their New Faculty Seminar Series (10.58). However, the amount of new material first year faculty members are exposed to can be overwhelming. Hence, they are not likely to retain this information. Also, since new instructors are encouraged to devote their early years to enhancing their instructional aptitude, campus involvement is delayed. Unfortunately, the habit of participation is much more difficult to develop once behavior patterns are established. As the modes of communication have moved rapidly from print, to electronic, to web-based media, the College has struggled to remain current. Each area of campus has established communication networks that meet their local needs. However, individuals from other areas are not aware of these structures or how to use them. Most importantly, no single individual or entity on campus bears the responsibility for maintaining or coordinating the systems. As a result, there is no single depository for institutional documents, although that was the intent behind creating the intranet J: drive.

Planning Agenda None. 2.b. The institution relies on faculty, its acaInstitutional Self Study — Spring 2011

demic senate or other appropriate faculty structures, the curriculum committee, and academic administrators for recommendations about student learning programs and services.

Descriptive Summary The North Orange County Community College District (NOCCCD) has established and implemented written policies providing faculty, staff, administrators, and students participation in the decision-making processes. These specific policies include: Board Policy 2430 — Delegation of Authority to the Chancellor, Board Policy 3100 — Organization Structure, Board Policy 3250 — Institutional Planning, Board Policy 6250 — Budget Management, and Board Policy 6300 — Fiscal Management. (10.53) The major legal provision that sets forth the official responsibilities and authority of the faculty is California Assembly Bill 1725 (10.22), which codified the principles of shared governance. The Board of Trustees has adopted the policy that it will “rely primarily” on the advice of the Academic Senate “or seek to reach mutual agreement” in the ten identified areas of academic and professional matters. In keeping with its Core Value of Inclusiveness, Cypress College is committed to the principle of shared governance and relies on the faculty as the major contributor on curricular and educational matters. As an institution, Cypress College values inclusiveness. Adherence to this value is manifest in the makeup of the College shared-governance committees. Each of the following committees includes membership from administration, faculty, classified staff, and students: President’s Advisory Cabinet, Diversity, Matriculation Advisory, Curriculum, Planning and Budget, all Direction Committees of the Strategic Planning Process, Planning and Budget Subcommittees, Staff Development, Student Equality Planning, and Campus Technology (10.42). In this respect, every aspect of governance that includes planning and curriculum development receives significant input from both faculty and administrators. The Curriculum Committee is a subcommittee of the Academic Senate and assumes primary responsibility for curricular issues. The Cypress College General Procedures on Curriculum describes the official responsibilities of faculty and academic administrators in 239

curricular matters (10.43). Both the committee membership and its function are weighted heavily toward faculty involvement. The curriculum process is made up of four phases: Consultation Phase, Campus Approval Phase, District Approval Phase, and Resolution Phase. (10.54) During the Consultation Phase, Division Representatives work with faculty within their divisions to create and/or modify their curriculum. Representatives ensure that the curriculum is in accordance with State law and College guidelines. Completed curricula are thoroughly reviewed before the Campus Approval Phase, during which the Technical Review Subcommittee evaluates the curriculum for technical errors. These errors are corrected before the curriculum is presented before the full committee for campus approval. Similarly, procedures at the District Approval and Resolution phase include a high level of faculty input and administrative cooperation. Recently, Cypress College has strengthened and streamlined this approval process through the utilization of the CurricUNET software to standardize formats and improve oversight (10.23). Every third year, each academic department conducts an internal Department Planning and Program Review (10.57) during which faculty members collaborate with one another to evaluate data from SLOs and other sources and develop plans for the future direction of their instructional program. During this review, instructors are encouraged to consider how well their department mission, goals, and action plans reflect the mission and broader goals of the College as articulated in the Educational Master Plan. These internal reviews are submitted to the Department Planning and Program Review Committee, which is composed of a faculty chair appointed by the Academic Senate, a faculty representative from each of the ten instructional divisions approved by the Academic Senate, and one dean.

Self Evaluation Cypress College has developed a comprehensive governance structure to ensure that both faculty and administrators have significant input into decisions that impact student learning and educational support services. This structure encourages input at both the local (i.e. departmental/divisional) level and at the campus level. Most departments rely on collective contributions from each individual instructor as they develop their goals 240

and SLOs, implement curriculum changes, and conduct their program review. The division dean is consulted during this process and submits a companion form that includes his/her observations and recommendations. The Program Review Committee reads these reviews and recommends changes before the final report is submitted to the Executive Vice President and campus committees to be used in considering funding requests for faculty, staff, facilities, and equipment. Similarly, both the division dean and faculty members within the division offer their input at the Consultation Phase in Curriculum Development to ensure that curriculum changes have broad general support before being presented at the campus level. In general, most faculty contribute to these local processes. Cypress College has established an inclusive model for campus-wide participation through its Educational Master Plan (EMP). The EMP “serves as the foundational document to inform and shape other campus plans” (10.5). The EMP also describes the history and the extensive collaborative effort that led to its development. Each subsequent plan developed to fulfill the goals of the EMP was created through a similarly collaborative process. Each was also approved by the Academic Senate, the Planning and Budget Committee, and President’s Advisory Cabinet before adoption. The implementation of the Student Services Plan, the Matriculation Plan, and the Technology Plan are all conducted with the oversight of an advisory committee that represents a range of constituencies. Representation on these and other campus-wide committees is voluntary. Fewer faculty choose to serve on these campus committees than contribute to the decisions made at the department and division levels. The extent to which faculty contribute to the planning and shared-governance processes decreases as the perceived distance from their instructional area increases. This “inverted involvement pyramid” results in a smaller number of faculty members contributing to the broader campus-wide decisions than those contributing to their immediate area. Currently, this picture represents the perceived pattern of campus involvement. Both the College administration and the faculty members who serve on campus-wide committees perceive this pattern of involvement to be detrimental to the decision-making process. However, there has not been a systematic study of campus involvement to verify whether this inverted involvement pyramid exists, and, Cypress College

if it does, whether it really is detrimental to College shared governance.

Planning Agenda None. 3. Through established governance structures, processes, and practices, the governing board, administrators, faculty, staff, and students work together for the good of the institution. These processes facilitate discussion of ideas and effective communication among the institution’s constituencies.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College maintains a strong commitment to the ideals and practices of shared governance. The campus community adheres to its core values of collegiality and inclusiveness in making policy decisions, soliciting input from all affected parties including faculty, classified staff, students, and administrators. These values are an extension of the District’s goals to create a transparent decision-making environment as befits a public institution. The following examples demonstrate how both District and College personnel work together to apply these ideals in their shared-governance practices. The District website is structured to provide public access to Board policies, meeting schedules, meeting agendas and minutes, and financial documents (10.10). District business is conducted in open session during bi-monthly meetings. Meeting minutes are comprehensive and thorough. Instances where sensitive legal issues are discussed in closed session are duly noted with references to appropriate Government Codes that support the Board’s actions. The District Director of Public Affairs prepares News from the Board of Trustees (10.49), which summarizes meeting highlights (10.49), and are distributed electronically to the constituent campuses. An example of the Trustees’ commitment to collective dialogue is the Annual Strategic Conversation. The topic of this year’s 11th Strategic Conversation was “Student Success.” Over 80 participants (including students, faculty, support staff, administrators, and Board members) discussed definitions of student success and shared personal experiences that affected their own ability to succeed. Strategic Conversations have been Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

held in the District since 1999 to encourage communication and interaction between staff, community, and Board of Trustee members. The comments and ideas shared at these informal conversations are compiled into follow-up reports, which serve as a reference for the Board as it addresses future policy matters (10.41). At the campus level, Cypress College has created a well-defined structure to conduct its planning activities (10.46). Using this structure, the College community collectively determines the goals and objectives of the institution based on a shared understanding of its mission, vision, and core values. In developing its guiding Educational Master Plan 2006-2016 (EMP) (10. 5), the College recognized the need to institutionalize datadriven decision making as part of its overall planning process. The EMP provides a detailed analysis of the College’s service area and student population in order to respond more efficiently to student needs. Assessing this information, faculty worked within the existing departmental structure to predict enrollment and occupational trends in their areas. Using these predictions, individual departments strive to define programs and develop support structures as a foundation for student success. The broadly defined institutional goals outlined in the EMP directly feed into the more specific planning objectives expressed in the Strategic Plan 2008-2011 (10.2). The basic foundation for the Strategic Plan was developed during a planning colloquium at the UCLA Conference Center in Lake Arrowhead in March 2008. Participants included personnel across all areas of the campus. Among the participants were 13 instructors (including two representing the Academic Senate), 5 students, 8 academic deans, 4 area coordinators and directors, 2 academic counselors, 2 research personnel, 9 other classified employees as well as the VP, EVP, and President of the College (10.47). Contributors engaged in structured dialogues addressing critical issues facing the College and its students. Based on the discussions of this diverse group, six primary challenges were identified. A steering committee used this information to develop a draft document containing five Strategic Directions with 37 objectives supporting 13 specific goals. The draft document was then distributed to campus committees including the Academic Senate, the Planning and Budget Committee, and the Enrollment Management Committee (5% 241

MORE) before being shared with the Leadership Team on May 2, 2008 (10.50). At this meeting, members suggested some minor revisions to improve the clarity and readability of the document before distribution for comment to the campus at large. After a waiting period for discussion and review, the President’s Advisory Cabinet adopted the Strategic Plan on September 18, 2008 (10.51). Five Direction Committees oversee the campus activities defined by the Strategic Plan to ensure that its objectives are being accomplished according to the proscribed timelines. Each committee seeks representation from all academic and support areas and from all personnel categories across campus. Committee members contact the lead persons identified by the Strategic Plan for progress updates on specific objectives. They also review spending proposals submitted to support these objectives and prioritize expenditures. The proposals are subsequently presented for approval to the Planning and Budget Committee and, finally, to the President’s Advisory Cabinet (PAC). Cypress College relies on several parallel structures to communicate the results of the decision-making processes. The College has adopted electronic communication as the preferred “official” medium for conveying information to students and employees. When students apply, they designate a primary email address through which they receive campus communications. All full-time faculty, adjunct faculty, and staff are issued email accounts under the @cypresscollege.edu domain name. Academic Computing is currently investigating the feasibility of extending this practice to include students and alumni as well, with plans to implement this policy in 2012-2013 (10.24). In addition to email, students and District employees have access to myGateway (10.55), a password-protected portal network with links to important messages and administrative processes throughout the District. The campus also provides access to District forms and the activities of the College’s various shared-governance committees through an archive of documents on an intranet J: drive. All Cypress College staff, including both full-time and adjunct faculty, can request a Novell account to access the J: drive. Due to the sensitive nature of some of the documents stored there, remote access and student access are restricted. This resource provides a centralized location for document 242

storage. However, since no individual has been designated responsibility for maintaining this archive, there is some difficulty in navigating the site and determining which forms are the most current. Because some issues require more interactive communication, deans and directors regularly meet bi-weekly with the President, VP, and EVP. At these meetings, administrators receive updates on policy decisions and the rationale behind them so that they, in turn, can communicate with their divisions. Directors also share information on campus events/incidents and their likely impact on personnel. Discussions and deliberations follow a participatory model that emphasizes consensus whenever possible with cordial acceptance of decisions when consensus proves elusive.

Self Evaluation The shared-governance structure at Cypress College reflects its culture and history as an institution. Campus Climate Surveys conducted biennially indicate a strong correlation between involvement and personal satisfaction with campus institutions and governance practices (10.3). In other words, the structures of the College’s participatory governance works well for those employees that participate. Unfortunately, not all personnel participate. Communicating with adjunct instructors proves to be a particularly difficult issue to address. Since many teach at multiple colleges, they often have three or more separate email accounts to monitor (10.26). Therefore, multiple modes of communication including email, written memos, and direct personal contact are required to keep them informed.

Planning Agenda None. 4. The institution advocates and demonstrates honesty and integrity in its relationships with external agencies. It agrees to comply with Accrediting Commission standards, policies, and guidelines, and Commission requirements for public disclosure, self-study, and other reports, team visits, and prior approval of substantive changes. The institution moves expeditiously to respond to recommendations made by the Commission. Cypress College

Descriptive Summary Cypress College recognizes the importance of integrity and openness in communication. As a public agency, the College is ultimately responsible to the public. Accrediting agencies are watchdogs for the public interest, providing the oversight necessary to ensure that the College is providing a quality education for its students. Since the institution also values excellence, it welcomes the feedback and recommendations. They are taken to heart and recognized for what they are: an opportunity for reflection and improvement. As a community, the College also understands that timely compliance with these regulations and standards serves to develop and maintain its professional relationships, reflecting well on the College and exemplifying its commitment to collegiality in all of its relationships.

Self Evaluation The College responds to external agencies consistently and accurately and makes deliberate efforts to maintain high standards of excellence. The 2008 Focused Mid-term Report (10.27) details progression toward completion of the 6 recommendations made by the Accrediting Commission, as well as recognition by the U.S. Department of Education’s (10.28) of Cypress College as an accredited institution with the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges. Specialized accreditations maintained by the Health Science Division include the American Board of Funeral Service Education (10.29), the Commission on Dental Accreditation (10.30), the Joint Review Committee on Education in Radiologic Technology (10.31), and the National League for Nursing Accrediting Commission (10.32). Additionally, a number of College programs are members of professional organizations and/or are in compliance with those professional industry standards. More specifically, the Automotive Technology Program is certified with the National Automotive Technicians Education Foundation (10.33); the Computer Information Systems program is Microsoft Office Specialist Certified (10.34); and the Air Conditioning/Refrigeration program is currently seeking certification with the Heating Ventilating Air Conditioning Excellence Organization (10.35).

Some of the College programs utilize industry agencies for course standardization. The Culinary Arts Program uses materials provided by the National Restaurant Association (10.36), and the Hotel Management Program uses materials provided by the American Hotel and Lodging Educational Institute (10.37). Partnerships have been developed with a variety of employers such as the Toyota Corporation (10.38) and its Toyota Technical Education Network (T-TEN) and the Johnson Controls’ Career Connect (10.39) Program to ensure that quality instruction leads directly to viable employment. The Career Technical Education and Economic Development, Health Science, and Business & CIS divisions are all in State compliance by annually hosting advisory meetings with industry leaders to maintain quality and currency in course and program offerings. In addition, the dean of Career Technical Education and Economic Development works closely with the U.S. Department of Education Office of Vocational and Adult Education, the California Department of Education Office of Workforce Development, and the California Community College Los Angeles/Orange County Regional Consortium. Campus deans are dedicated to maintaining collaborative relationships with local industries and attend city and Chamber of Commerce events. Campus deans and other campus staff also participate in various activities and meetings with the California Workforce Investment Board (WIB). A Public Information Office maintains an open and cooperative relationship with the media and, through the College’s comprehensive website, provides public access to current and archived catalogs, schedules, newsletters, accreditation documents, institutional publications, and campus calendars. Students, faculty, and staff have access to their private documents through the myGateway portal (10.55). A full-time Articulation Officer maintains course agreements with 2- and 4-year institutions, a part-time Technical Preparation Coordinator maintains course agreements, alignments, and career pathways with local high schools and Regional Occupation Programs, and all full-time counselors have liaison assignments with the local high schools to encourage and enhance student academic progress. The final phase of the 2002 voter-approved Measure

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

243

X Remodel for Efficiency project was completed with the Humanities building rededication in Spring 2010 (10.40).

Planning Agenda None. 5. The role of leadership and the institution’s governance and decision-making structures and processes are regularly evaluated to assure their integrity and effectiveness. The institution widely communicates the results of these evaluations and uses them as the basis for improvement.

Descriptive Summary Cypress College has not created a formal review process to evaluate its organizational governance structure, although this structure is periodically evaluated in the preparation of its Accreditation Self Study (10.16). Nevertheless, informal discussions occur regularly as part of the shared-governance process. Specific conversations arise when vacancies occur or in response to economic downturns. Each administrative vacancy is reviewed thoroughly to evaluate the necessity of filling the position. At times, administrative duties are shuffled or combined in response to economic uncertainties. When circumstances dictate a more comprehensive response, the President’s Advisory Cabinet may suggest the formation of a Reorganization Task Force composed of faculty, administrators, and classified personnel. This task force is charged with assessing the current governance structure and making recommendations to manage both short-term and long-term reorganizations. Individual administrators are evaluated yearly by their immediate management supervisor based on criteria set forth in the Management Appraisal Instrument as well as mutually agreed-upon goals and objectives. Every third year, administrators undergo a comprehensive review and are evaluated by a broad cross-section of College employees using the same criteria (10.53). The biennial Campus Climate Survey provides feedback of a more general nature about impressions of the College environment (10.6). An entire section is dedicated to the evaluation of campus governance and job satisfaction. The Office of Institutional Research and 244

Planning conducts these surveys, analyzes the results, and creates a report that is accessible through their website. The results of this survey are widely circulated through presentations at Leadership Team meetings and at campus Opening Day events. Cypress College regularly conducts comprehensive surveys of both students and staff to evaluate all functional units on the campus. The Student Survey is conducted every Fall in odd-numbered years while the Campus Climate Survey is conducted in the Spring semesters of even-numbered years. These surveys are distributed both electronically and via regular mail format to maximize responses and ensure a representative data set (10.3). In addition, the Campus Support Services Survey is conducted every three years in the Spring semester. These surveys become part of the Quality Review process for Student Support Services, Campus Support Services, and Special Programs. The Special Programs survey began in Spring 2008, and the rotation schedule has yet to be determined. The results of these surveys are evaluated by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning. Researchers publish comprehensive reports on their website (10.7c), on the campus J: drive (10.11), and in a shortened version on the campus website (10.52). The results are evaluated by representatives from administration, student support services, and special programs areas. If changes for improvement are recommended, they are forwarded to the various shared-governance decisionmaking bodies (10.45, 10.48), including designated management teams, the Planning and Budget Committee, and the President’s Advisory Cabinet. Minutes of these meetings are posted on the campus J: drive for the entire campus community to review.

Self Evaluation Cypress College has established an effective means for evaluating the opinions of student and staff through an orchestrated series of surveys. The results of these surveys are communicated through a variety of forums and serve to inform the decision-making process on campus. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning has developed a “Dashboard,” an effective visual format for integrating the various measures of institutional effectiveness and connecting them with the established governance structure (10.56). This dashboard provides a detailed summary of the current staCypress College

tus and progress toward the goals outlined in the Strategic Plan. The website for the Office of Institutional Research and Planning contains links to the analysis and written reports for the most recent campus-wide surveys. Full implementation of the TracDat assessment management software promises a great advance in centralizing campus information. However, the existence of multiple storage locations and separate sites for storing present and past reports creates confusion among campus employees. Cypress College management is particularly sensitive to concerns about personal job satisfaction and the degree to which individuals are involved and content with the governance process. In fact, the Campus Climate Survey for Spring 2010 (but conducted in Fall 2009 for use in the Self Study) asked 14 specific questions relating to these issues (10.3). The results of this study indicate that there is general satisfaction with campus governance, but that administrators express a significantly more positive opinion than do other segments of the campus community.

Planning Agenda None. Reference Documents 10.1 Cypress College Catalog — www.cypresscollege. edu/academics/CollegeCatalog.aspx 10.2 Cypress College Strategic Plan 2008-2011 — www. cypresscollege.edu/Media/Website%20Resources/ PDFs/ir/Strategic%20Plan%202008-2011%20Final. pdf

10.7 Cypress College Institutional Effectiveness Report 2008-2009, p. 61 — www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/ Resources/Research/SE/IER2009forwebsite.pdf 10.7b Cypress College Institutional Effectiveness Report 2009-2010, p. 63 — www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/ Resources/Research/SE/IER2009forwebsite.pdf 10.7c Office of Institutional Research and Planning webpage — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch. 10.8 Higher Education: A Report and Collection of Institutional Practices of the Student Learning Initiative 10.9 Cypress College Accreditation Self Study 2005 — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/Accreditation/areports.aspx 10.10 North Orange County Community College District website — www.nocccd.edu/ 10.11 Cypress College Campus — J:drive 10.12 Richard Fee, Dean: SEM. — Personal communication 10.13 Cypress College Academic Senate Constitution and By-Laws — J:\Academic Senate\Academic Senate Constitution & By-laws\Constitution & By-laws adopted and ratified April 2008.doc 10.14 Faculty Contracts — www.nocccd.edu/Departments/HR/UnionContracts.htm 10.15 California School Employees’ Association (CSEA) By-Laws — www.nocccd.edu/Departments/HR/ documents/CSEAContract2007-2010.pdf 10.16 Meeting minutes archived in President’s and Executive Vice President’s offices 10.17 Shared Governance Committees — J:\Shared Governance Committees

10.3 Climate Survey of Faculty and Staff, 2009-2010 — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rsurveys.aspx

10.18 Ryan Billings, Vice President Cypress College Associated Students — Personal Communication

10.3b Climate Survey, 2009-2010 (additional unpublished data from the Office of Institutional Research)

10.19 Institutional Effectiveness Plan — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments. aspx

10.4 Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory Fall 2009, published 2010 — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/ InstitutionalResearch/rsurveys.aspx

10.22 Assembly Bill 1725 — www.faccc.org/ADVOCACY/ bills/historical/ab1725.PDF

10.5 Cypress College Educational Master Plan, 2006 -2016 — www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/Resources/ Planning/EducationalMasterPlan.pdf 10.6 Cypress College Strategic Plan Update 2009 — www.cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

10.23 CurricUNET — www.curricunet.com/cypress/ 10.24 Personal communication: Mike Kavanaugh, Director of Academic Computing 10.25 Cypress College — How to Get Involved. (expected completion date Spring 2011)

245

10.26 Basic Skills initiative Regional Meeting discussion, Fall 2009. Richard Fee — Personal Communication 10.27 Focused Midterm Report to the Accrediting Commission (2008) — www.cypresscollege.edu/IRP/ Resources/Accreditation/R/FocusedMidTermReport_Final_Feb5_2008.pdf 10.28 “The Database of Accredited Postsecondary Institutions and Programs.” U.S. Department of Education. Web. 15 Nov. 2009 — www.ope.ed.gov/accreditation/ 10.29 “ABFSE Directory of Programs – California.” American Board of Funeral Service Education. Web. 10 March 2010 — www.abfse.org/html/dir-ca.html 10.30 “Commission on Dental Accreditation.” American Dental Association. Web. 17 Mar. 2010 — www. ada.org/prof/ed/programs/index.asp 10.31 “Accredited Programs.” Joint Review Committee on Education in Radiologic Technology — www.jrcert. org/ Web. 17 Mar. 2010. 10.32 “NLNAC Accredited Nursing Programs.” National League for Nursing Accrediting Commission, Inc. Web. 17 Mar. 2010 — www.nlnac.org/home.htm 10.33 “NATEF: Certification Process.” National Automotive Technicians Education Foundation. Web. 15 Nov. 2009 — www.natef.org/certification.cfm 10.34 “Microsoft: Certification.” Microsoft. Web 15 Nov. 2009 — www.microsoft.com/learning/en/us/default. aspx 10.35 “HVAC Excellence.” HVAC Excellence. Web. 15 Nov. 2009 — www.hvacexcellence.org/Default.aspx 10.36 “NRA: ManageFirst.” National Restaurant Association Education Foundation. Web. 15 Nov. 2009 — www.managefirst.restaurant.org/ 10.37 “AHLA: Hospitality Training, Certification and Education.” American Hotel and Lodging Educational Institute. Web. 15 Nov. 2009 — www.ei-ahla.org/ 10.38 “T-TEN Find a School.” Toyota Motor Sales Corporation. Web. 15 Nov. 2009 — www.toyota.com/ about/tten/ 10.39 “Johnson Controls: Career Connect.” Johnson Controls. Web. 15 Nov. 2009 — www.johnsoncontrols.com/publish/us/en/careers/college_recruiting1/ Career_Connect/partner_schools.html

Paper — www.nocccd.edu/documents/StrategicConversation11Summary.pdf 10.42 President’s Advisory Cabinet — J:\President’s Advisory Cabinet\Shared Governance Process 10.43 General Procedures on Curriculum: Curriculum minutes & Other Info — J:\Curriculum minutes & Other Info\General Procedures on Curriculum.doc 10.45 Planning and Budget Committee — J:\Planning & Budget Committee 10.46 Cypress College Strategic Plan 2008-2011: Appendix A — www.cypresscollege.edu/Media/Website%20Resources/PDFs/ir/Strategic%20Plan%20 2008-2011%20Final.pdf 10.47 Cypress College Strategic Plan 2008-2011: Appendix B — www.cypresscollege.edu/Media/Website%20Resources/PDFs/ir/Strategic%20Plan%20 2008-2011%20Final.pdf 10.48 President’s Advisory Cabinet — J:\President’s Advisory Cabinet 10.49 News from the Board — www.nocccd.edu/Trustees/NewsFromBofT1011.htm 10.50 Leadership Team Meeting Agenda: Maintained by the Office of the President 10.51 President’s Advisory Cabinet\2008-2009 — J:\President’s Advisory Cabinet\2008-2009\PAC Minutes 09-18-08a.doc 10.52 Cypress College Website — www.cypresscollege. edu 10.53 North Orange County Community College District Website- Board Policies — www.nocccd.edu/Policies/PoliciesAndProcedures.htm 10.54 The Curriculum Process — J:\curriculum minutes and other information 10.55 MyGateway Portal — mygateway.nocccd.edu/cp/ home/loginf 10.56 Dashboard Format — www.cypresscollege.edu/ Media/Website%20Resources/PDFs/pio/2009CypressCollege-Dashboard.pdf 10.57 Department Planning and Program Review — www. cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ProgramReview

10.40 North Orange County Community College District Website- Building Progress Report 2009 — www. nocccd.edu/Departments/FandF/FacilitiesBond/ documents/BuildingProgressReport2009.pdf 10.41 11th Annual Strategic Conversation Background

246

Cypress College

Standard IVB: Board and Administrative Organization In addition to the leadership of individuals and constituencies, institutions recognize the designated responsibilities of the governing board for setting policies and of the chief administrator for the effective operation of the institution. Multi-college districts clearly define the organizational roles of the district and the colleges. 1. The institution has a governing board that is responsible for establishing policies to assure the quality, integrity, and effectiveness of the student learning programs and services and the financial stability of the institution. The governing board adheres to a clearly defined policy for selecting and evaluating the chief administrator for the college or the district. 1.a. The governing board is an independent policy-making body that reflects the public interest in board activities and decisions. Once the board reaches a decision, it acts as a whole.

Descriptive Summary Board Policy 2010 (11.1) sets forth the formal regulations regarding how the Board is constituted. The Board consists of seven members, with staggered elections held every two years for the participation of registered voters in the North Orange County Community College District (NOCCCD). Each Trustee represents one of four specific geographic areas within the District. The Trustee must live in that area but is elected at large by all voters within the District. Trustees are elected to four-year terms of office. The backgrounds of current Board members include experience in both the private and public sectors. Several have also been involved in local and state politics. All of the current members have served multiple terms, providing continuity and stability to the District in their role as Trustees. Two Student Trustees also serve on the Board. The Student Trustees participate in all open Board discussions and activities while representing the interests and issues of their respective colleges. Student Trustees are elected by the students at their respective colleges each Spring and serve one-year terms beginning in June. Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Self Evaluation The Board engages in effective open debate on issues relevant to the College as contained in Board agendas. The Board acts in a conscientious manner to encourage input from the constituent groups and from the public. Once action has been taken on agenda items, the Board acts as a cohesive team in assuring appropriate implementation. Board meetings provide the opportunity for internal and external constituents to be heard on policy and other matters. The Board is conscientious in listening to complaints and concerns while serving as a buffer, explaining the parameters of District initiatives and the limitations under which the colleges and School of Continuing Education operate. Regularly scheduled Board meetings serve as forums for the Board to receive information and to act as advocates for the Colleges and the School of Continuing Education. They are unified in serving to protect and advance the well being of the College while being appropriately responsive to the community.

Planning Agenda None. 1.b. The governing board establishes policies consistent with the mission statement to ensure the quality, integrity, and improvement of student learning programs and services and the resources necessary to support them.

Descriptive Summary The North Orange County Community College District has adopted its own mission statement (BP 1001): “The mission of the North Orange County Community College District is to serve and enrich our communities and inspire life-long learning by providing education that is exemplary, relevant, and accessible.” (11.1) The mission statement further states: “Cypress College and Fullerton College will offer associate degrees, vocational certificates and transfer education, as well as developmental instruction and a broad array of specialized training. The School of Continuing Education will offer non-college credit programs including high school diploma completion, basic skills, vocational certificates and self development courses. Specific activities in both the colleges and School of Continuing Education will be directed toward economic develop247

ment within the community.” The mission statement also provides that Cypress and Fullerton colleges “will offer associate degrees, vocational certificates and transfer education as well as developmental instruction and a broad array of specialized training.” The District has adopted a Philosophy Statement, BP 1002, (11.1) that includes the following, “Trustees, faculty, staff and administrators have the responsibility to provide and support educational offerings of the highest quality and value to students and the community.” These policy statements articulate the Board’s commitment to ensuring high quality programs and services. District Board Policies, Administrative Procedures, and the Administrative Guide (11.1) are intended to provide the specific means through which the District operationalizes its mission and philosophy.

Self Evaluation The Board engages in an ongoing process of review of all its policies and procedures. That review process involves participation by faculty, staff, students, and administrative personnel from the District, Cypress College, Fullerton College and the School of Continuing Education. All entities have representation on Chancellor’s Cabinet. The District Planning Council (DPC) serves as the primary body responsible for ensuring that the institutions receive the resources necessary to comply with the mission of the District as articulated by the Board. In addition, ongoing and ad hoc financial matters are discussed among the District and campus budget officers at the Budget Managers meetings, which coincide with regularly scheduled Board meetings. The information discussed at the Budget Managers meetings is presented as appropriate to the membership of the DPC to be used in discussions relevant to allocation of resources. Topics relevant to these discussions include FTES allocations, budget allocations, and human resource allocations (11.25).

Planning Agenda None. 1.c. The governing board has ultimate responsibility for educational quality, legal matters, and financial integrity.

248

Descriptive Summary Legal authority for the Board of Trustees to operate on behalf of the North Orange County Community College District is provided in provisions of the California Education Code §70902 et al. (11.2), Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations, §51004 et al. (11.3) and the Procedures and Standing Orders of the Board of Governors, Article 3, §331 et al. (11.4). The Board is the ultimate arbiter regarding issues of educational quality, legal matters, and fiscal integrity of the District. Board Policy 1002 (11.1) specifically states, “The Board of Trustees, faculty, staff and administrators have the responsibility to provide and support educational offerings of the highest quality and value to students and to the community.” Local Board Policy does not specifically address the Board’s responsibility in legal matters; however, its authority in this arena is assumed under the general authorization given Boards of Trustees via state statutes and regulations.

Self Evaluation The Board of Trustees has ultimate responsibility for developing policies to guide the District. However, the Board recognizes and operates in accord with the principal that those closest to issues are often best able to resolve those issues. Consequently, the Board encourages input and strives to base its decisions on policy. The Board relies primarily upon recommendations from the District staff, i.e., the Chancellor, the Vice Chancellors of Finance and Human Resources, and the Directors of Information Services and Public Affairs, the Presidents of Cypress and Fullerton Colleges and the Provost of the School of Continuing Education. The Board also receives input and direction from the District constituent groups, including the Academic Senates, the collective bargaining groups, classified and confidential representatives and the management group. The Board receives input from these constituent groups through their representatives serving on District committees and from the resource table at regularly scheduled Board meetings. Student Trustees from each College participate in all open procedures of the Board and represent the student voice.

Planning Agenda None.

Cypress College

1.d. The institution or the governing board publishes the board bylaws and policies specifying the board’s size, duties, responsibilities, structure, and operating procedures.

Descriptive Summary Board bylaws and policies specifying duties, responsibilities, structure, and operating procedures are contained in District Board Policies, Administrative Procedures and the Administrative Guide (11.1). Hard copies of these documents are available at the District Office. These materials can also be accessed via the District website.

Self Evaluation Nine years ago, hard copies of the District’s governing documents, including all Board Policies and Administrative Procedures and the Administrative Guide, were kept in every department and administrative office so that all employees could have access to them at any time. On June 12, 2001, it was decided that these documents would be made available electronically on the District’s website (11.1) with hard copies no longer being provided as before. The intent was to reduce the enormous use of paper required to provide hard copies in every department throughout the District. All staff are responsible for having knowledge of Board Policies and adherence to them in the performance of their job. Unfortunately, at the present there are still a significant number of staff that either don’t have access to a computer, lack the training to use them due to their job locations, and/or access to a dedicated computer. Classified staff members are encouraged to engage in staff development activities that will enhance their familiarity and proficiency with technology, especially those technologies that are job related. Classified employees in lead positions are required to have immediate access to the technology directly related to their responsibilities. This need may preclude the use of such technology by others. Whenever the College is made aware of issues of access to technology, it responds appropriately to determine the extent of need and to develop solutions that maintain an appropriate workplace environment. As the College becomes increasingly dependent upon technology, training opportunities for employees must also become increasingly available.

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Planning Agenda None. 1.e. The governing Board acts in a manner consistent with its policies and bylaws. The board regularly evaluates its policies and practices and revises them as necessary.

Descriptive Summary Since the last accreditation report, the Board has remained consistent with its policies and bylaws. Through monthly Board meetings and the DPC/Chancellor’s Cabinet, the Board regularly evaluates its policies and practices and revises when necessary. Recent examples of such scrutiny include the development of a District statement on ethics (BP/AP 3050), a District policy addressing legislative changes to nursing student selection processes (BP/AP 4106), and revisions to AP 6150, Designation of Authorized Signatures (11.5).

Self Evaluation BP/AP 2410 (11.1) refers to how Board policies and procedures are established and revised. Board meeting minutes, which are posted to the District website (11.5) as well as to the Cypress College campus server (11.6), reflect evidence that the Board is operating in a manner consistent with its responsibilities under this policy and procedure. Any employee, student, or member of the public may initiate a review of any policy by submitting a request or recommendation in writing to the Chancellor’s Office. The DPC/Chancellor’s Cabinet, which includes managers and constituent representatives from all of the campuses, has the opportunity to review and discuss current and new policies and procedures and make recommendations to the Chancellor’s Cabinet. All meeting minutes from the DPC/Chancellor’s Cabinet are posted to the campus server (11.6) and are accessible to all employees. The minutes further support the processes that are in place to review and make recommendations regarding Board policies and procedures.

Planning Agenda None. 1.f. The governing board has a program for board development and new member orienta249

tion. It has a mechanism for providing for continuity of board membership and staggered terms of office.

Descriptive Summary Per BP/AP 2740, the District Chancellor’s Office provides an orientation and handbook to newly elected Board members (11.1 ). New trustees have an orientation meeting with the Chancellor, College Presidents/ Provost, and constituent groups, in addition to reams of documents they receive to read. Trustees receive excellent training from the Community College League of California’s new trustee workshop, including a new student trustee workshop. In addition, Board members receive further development through attendance at various state-wide and nation-wide conferences and workshops, Board Strategic Conversations, and the “Trustee/Chancellor Coffees” held at the campuses. The Orange County Department of Education (OCDE) is a resource regarding trustee elections for all school districts within its jurisdiction and acts as a source of information to the public. NOCCCD adheres to guidelines set forth by the OCDE and also acts as a public resource for trustee elections. The trustees are elected to four-year terms with staggered elections held every two years.

Self Evaluation BP 2010 (11.1) sets forth the terms for Board membership. In general, the Board development and new member orientation processes are working well as indicated by the stability of the Board. Trustees actively participate in state-wide opportunities such as serving on the California Community College Trustees Board and the Community College League of California’s Commission on the Future. The trustees conscientiously seek ongoing education by attending conferences and workshops in addition to reviewing newspaper clippings and educational articles, which bring a wealth of information that facilitates the Board’s decision-making ability and helps develop best practices throughout the District. Although there may not exist a clear process or measure for evaluating the processes, the Board’s stability and the District’s fiscal stability, along with the Board’s involvement statewide are strong indications that the 250

processes are effective.

Planning Agenda None. 1.g. The governing board’s Self Evaluation processes for assessing board performance are clearly defined, implemented, and published in its policies or bylaws.

Descriptive Summary The Board’s Self Evaluation requirements and process is described in AP 2745 Board Self Evaluation (11.1). There was an assessment of the Board of Trustees compiled in April 2009 and contained responses from both the resource table and the Trustees (11.7). The majority of the respondents indicated a rating of acceptable to excellent for all questions on the assessment instrument. The following questions received only acceptable to excellent ratings from all respondents:

◊

The Board when giving direction to staff is based on a consensus of a majority of the Board. Individual Board Members do not assume this authority.

◊

The Board Members respect each others’ opinions.

◊

Board Members are punctual to and attend all meetings to conclusion.

◊

The Board reviews agenda materials and is prepared for Board meetings.

◊

The Board conducts its meetings in compliance with state laws, including the Brown Act.

◊

Board meetings include some education or information time.

◊

Board meetings provide adequate time for discussion.

◊

Board Members are knowledgeable about community college and state-related issues.

◊

The Board acts as an advocate for community colleges.

◊

The Board gives adequate attention to Cypress College

the mission and goals of the District.

◊

ment and a strategic plan that looks to the future, anticipating what the institution and its colleges will look like in 10 years.

The Board has a procedure for annual evaluations of the Chancellor.

The following questions reflect where resource table respondents indicated some degree of a need for improvement.

◊

The Board monitors outcomes by requiring institutional effectiveness measures.

◊

The Board reaches decisions on the basis of study of all available background data and consideration of the recommendations of the Chancellor.

◊

New Board Members, including Student Trustee, receive and orientation to rules and responsibilities and District mission and policies.

◊

The Board’s highest priority is student learning and student success.

◊

The Board monitors outcomes by requiring institutional effectiveness measures.

◊

Discussions are structured so that all have an opportunity to contribute to the decisions.

◊

Board Members have adequate information upon which to base decisions.

◊

The Board reaches decisions on the basis of study of all available background data and consideration of the recommendations of the Chancellor.

Board Members are available to District employees for comments and suggestions.

◊

The Board shows its support for the District through members attending various events.

◊

The Board is knowledgeable about the District’s history, values, strengths, and weaknesses.

◊

The Board is knowledgeable about the District’s history, values, strengths, and weaknesses.

◊

The Board has processes in place for appropriately involving the community in relevant decisions.

◊

The Board understands, appreciates, and is responsive to the diverse community which it serves.

◊

The Board helps promote the image of the District in the community.

◊

The Board understands the collective bargaining process and its role in the process.

The Board has processes in place for appropriately involving the community in relevant decisions.

◊

The Board understands the collective bargaining process and its role in the process.

◊

The Board is involved in and understands the budget process.

◊

The Board demonstrates a good understanding of collegial consultation and related processes.

◊ ◊

The Board is involved in and understands the budget process. The Board demonstrates a good understanding of collegial consultation and related processes.

The following questions reflect where the Trustee respondents indicated some degree of a need for improvement.

◊

The Board has clearly defined instructional goals with desired outcomes both short and long term.

◊

The Board has established a vision state-

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Self Evaluation The Board adheres to its requirement of self evaluation every two years. The results are included in the Board agendas and are posted to the District and campus servers. 251

An assessment of the Board of Trustees in April 2009 included responses from 12 members of the resource tables and six of the Trustees (11.7). In those documents there was consensus by 67% of the respondents that the Board members do an acceptable job of setting priorities that are both strategic and manageable and provide direction for the administration. There was a comment from a Trustee that, “We could have greater clarity to meet the ‘strategic and manageable’ criteria” (11.26). There is also consensus ranging from acceptable to excellent that the Board agendas focus on policy issues that relate to Board responsibilities and that agendas include legislative and state policy issues that will impact the District. Since this evaluation, the Board has addressed the concerns of the resource table. It is reassuring that the Board was willing to be openly critical of its own performance and that it has been addressing these issues. The Board’s evaluation instrument is regularly reviewed and revised prior to distribution. Also, Board policies and administrative procedures are reviewed regularly and revised as necessary. In addition to the Trustees’ Self Evaluations, the Board believes it benefits from being evaluated by individuals other than members of the Board, and the Board gives proper attention to the feedback received. Board Strategic Conversations are beneficial because they allow for interaction with faculty and staff from the three campuses and provide an opportunity for the trustees to listen to concerns/points of view on various matters (11.5).

Planning Agenda None. 1.h. The governing board has a code of ethics that includes a clearly defined policy for dealing with behavior that violates that code.

Descriptive Summary Board members are obliged to maintain high standards of ethical conduct per BP/AP 2715 Code of Ethics/Standards of Practice (11.1). The BP identifies twelve ethical standards that address conflict of interest: Board decisions only during legally constituted meetings; confidentiality of closed session discussions; maintaining independent judgment unbiased by oth252

er interest influences; ensure nondiscrimination in its policies, procedures and actions; hold student access and success as primary concern and assure a visible physical presence at appropriate functions; consistently attending meetings and being properly prepared; conducting all business in open meetings; take advantage of educational opportunities to enhance effectiveness as a Board member; promote and maintain good relations with fellow Board members; promote an effective working relations with the Chancellor and staff; and be and advocate for the District in the community. It also contains provisions for dealing with complaints or charges of Trustee misconduct. The AP requires that each member of the Board reaffirm adherence to the Code of Ethics by signing a statement at the annual organizational meeting. In March 2009, a BP/AP 3050 Institutional Code of Ethics was proposed for consideration in Chancellor’s Cabinet (11.25). Creation of an Institutional Code of Ethics that addresses the behavior and conduct of all employees in the District was the charge of the Accreditation Team upon the completion of the 2005 Accreditation Self Study. BP/AP 3050 was completed and adopted in Spring 2010 (11.1).

Self Evaluation BP 2715 Code of Ethics/Standards of Practice is well thought out and fairly comprehensive; however, the language dealing with Trustee misconduct also includes processes and procedures that would be better suited for the companion Administrative Procedure. On review of the Proposed BP/AP 3050, the constituent groups’ opinion was that the tone of the documents was not appropriate for their purpose, so the Vice Chancellor of Human Resources was given the assignment to make the adjustments and bring it back. In March 2010, BP/AP 3050 was reintroduced in Chancellor’s Cabinet and subsequently approved by consensus. However, the language of the proposed AP 3050 still contained language of similar tone to the first draft. On April 12, 2010, AP 3050 was adopted in Chancellor’s Cabinet after some language modification and much discussion. It was agreed that the tone of the document had become more acceptable and clearer. To illustrate, the purpose statement changed from: “Because of its responsibility to the public, and because the effectiveness of a public educational instituCypress College

tion is directly related to the public’s perception of its integrity, it is the policy of the North Orange County Community College District (hereinafter “District”) to conduct itself with honesty in all of its dealings. The District is committed to public accountability and transparency in its mission and operations.”

Self Evaluation

“The North Orange County Community College District (hereinafter “District”) recognizes its responsibility and obligation to the public to conduct its business with honesty, integrity, professionalism, and quality in the performance of those operations and functions necessary to achieve its established mission and philosophy as described in Board Policy. To that end, the District is committed to public accountability and transparency.”

Board members gain knowledge of their role in the accreditation process through a combination of orientation workshops, training, participation in state and national conferences, and assessment practices that provide them with resources needed to carry out their responsibilities. Noted in the July 27, 2010, Board minutes, is discussion regarding Board development and self evaluation as they relate to the accreditation process. Significant to this are the ways in which Board members demonstrate their involvement in accreditation by consistently encouraging and receiving regular constituent input at Board meetings, campus/community functions, conferences/workshops, and via telephone or email.

Planning Agenda

to:

None.

1.i. The governing board is informed about and involved in the accreditation process.

1.j. The governing board has the responsibility for selecting and evaluating the district/system chief administrator (most often known as the chancellor) in a multi-college district/system or the college chief administrator (most often known as the president) in the case of a single college. The governing board delegates full responsibility and authority to him/her to implement and administer board policies without board interference and holds him/her accountable for the operation of the district/ system or college, respectively. In multi-college districts/systems, the governing board establishes a clearly defined policy for selecting and evaluating the presidents of the colleges.

Descriptive Summary The Board is concerned about the natural correlation between trusteeship and accreditation and uses that as a framework for assessing how well the institution is meeting its educational and societal mission. The Board is involved in the accreditation process through established governance, procedures, and practices to ensure that it works cohesively with administrators, faculty, staff, and students for the good of the District. The established processes facilitate discussion of ideas and effective communication among the institution’s constituencies. The Board of Trustees adopted BP/AP 3200 Accreditation (11.1) in March 2004 to ensure adherence to accreditation standards and process. The Board was provided with progress reports and a timeline of the accreditation self study on October 13, 2009, (11.5) and May 11, 2010 (11.5). The Self Study Chair attended the July 27, 2010, Board meeting to engage in discussion with the Trustees regarding areas of Standard IVB and the Trustees’ views on the effectiveness of some of their processes. At the August 10, 2010, Board meeting, a printed draft of the Cypress College Self Study was presented to the Board (11.5). Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Descriptive Summary Board Policy 2200, Board Duties and Responsibilities, Section 2.0, Subsection 2.3 identifies the Board of Trustees’ responsibility to hire and evaluate the Chancellor (11.1). The Board’s responsibility for hiring the Chancellor should there be a vacancy in that position is also identified in BP 2431 (11.1). Additionally, Subsection 2.4 of BP 2200 identifies the Board’s responsibility to delegate power and authority to the Chancellor to effectively lead the District. The Board’s delegation of authority to the Chancellor is more clearly and specifically defined in BP2430 (11.1). It empowers the Chan253

cellor to reasonably interpret Board policy. Where there is no Board policy, the Chancellor has the power to act, but such actions are subject to review by the Board. The Chancellor is expected to perform the duties contained in the Chancellor’s job description and fulfill other responsibilities as determined in annual goal-setting or evaluation sessions. BP 2432 delegates authority to the Chancellor to appoint an acting Chancellor to serve in his or her absence for periods not to exceed 30 days at a time (11.1). The Board is obligated to evaluate the Chancellor on an annual basis as specified in BP/AP 2435 (11.1). The evaluation shall comply with any requirements set forth in the contract of employment with the Chancellor as well as BP 2435. The Board evaluates the Chancellor on his job description and the goals and objectives that were jointly agreed upon by the Board and the Chancellor. Members of the resource table are given evaluation forms to fill out regarding the Chancellor’s performance (11.27). Since those are the individuals in the District who have the greatest and closest contact with the Chancellor, seeking their input is critical to achieving a valid evaluation. According to BP 3250, the Chancellor must ensure the District has and implements a broad-based comprehensive, systematic, and integrated system of planning that involves appropriate segments of the College community and is supported by institutional effectiveness research (11.1). The planning system includes plans required by law including, but not limited to, Long-Range Educational or Academic Master Plan; Facilities; Faculty and Staff Diversity; Student Equity; Matriculation; Transfer Center; Cooperative Work Experience; and Extended Opportunity Programs & Services (EOPS). Plans requiring Board approval per Title 5 are submitted to the Board by the Chancellor. The Chancellor informs the Board about the status of planning and the various plans and ensures that the Board has an opportunity to assist in developing the general institutional mission and goals for the comprehensive plans. AP 3250 provides for how these plans are to be accomplished by the involvement of the established committees and representational groups throughout the institutions multi-college system (11.1). Utilization of institutional effectiveness research, program reviews, and individual unit plans complement and inform the resource allocation process.

254

The Chancellor reports to the Board at its regular meetings that are generally held every second and fourth Tuesday of the month. The Board avails itself of the opportunity to question the Chancellor, as well as other members of the resource table, in order to ensure that it has sufficient information on institutional performance to allow it to fulfill its responsibilities. The Board also periodically requests reports from the Chancellor and other members of the resource table regarding the status of ongoing activities and plans. When the Board asks the Chancellor for a report, he either reports back directly with an explanation or delegates it to the appropriate person. If delegated, that individual either provides the explanation or does so in the form of a presentation, which may include other resources and PowerPoint. Topics include areas such as budget, campus construction, and the success of basic skills programs. Soliciting input from the constituent resource personnel is usually confined to a specific topic or agenda item of the moment and is generally responded to in an impromptu manner. Examples of this interaction between the Board, the Chancellor and resource personnel are available in the minutes of the Board of Trustees meetings (11.5). Since the last accreditation self study, the North Orange County Community College District (NOCCCD) saw the retirement of its Chancellor and underwent the hiring process for a new Chancellor. Dr. Jerome Hunter retired from his position as Chancellor of NOCCCD June 30, 2009. Dr. Ned Doffoney was hired as his successor effective July 14, 2009. AP 7120-4 dictated the formation of the committee and how the hiring process was conducted (11.1). AP 7120-4 applied to all management hirings up to and including the position of Chancellor. When the Board decided to conduct a search for Dr. Hunter’s replacement, they indicated that they wanted to have more control over the makeup of the committee, how it conducted the search, and possibly even have the authority to alter its hiring procedures and parameters. Some of the constituent groups were opposed to these changes and asserted that what the Board was proposing would not be in conformance with the provisions of AP 7120-4. Also, some of the constituent groups asserted statutory provisions that gave them the right to appoint their representatives to the hiring committee. Both the Board and the constituent groups conceded that it would not be feasible to change the AP within the Board’s timetable for having Cypress College

a new Chancellor in place, so it was decided to use AP 7120-4, as written, in hiring the new Chancellor, and then create a new AP that would be specific to hiring a Chancellor.

authority of the Board in hiring the Chancellor, their relationship with each other, and the Board’s ability to determine how effectively the Chancellor’s duties are performed.

At the March 10, 2009, Board of Trustees meeting, there was more discussion between the Board and the constituent groups concerning AP 7120-4 and the Board’s desire to change how a Chancellor is hired (11.5). As a result, the Board decided to form a subcommittee comprised of three Trustees for the purpose of researching the Chancellor selection process and then make recommendations. At the August 25, 2009, Board of Trustees meeting, the Board’s subcommittee presented a draft of a new AP 2431, Chancellor Selection (11.5). Again there was much discussion between the Board and the constituent groups. Upon conclusion of that discussion, the Board requested that the proposed AP 2431 go through the Chancellor’s Cabinet process and that written justification be provided for any revisions to the proposed AP, which would then return to the Board for final approval. At the February 9, 2010, Board meeting, the Trustees received as Agenda Item No. 6.a.2 a revised version of their proposed AP, with the justifications as requested (11.5). The Trustees are currently reviewing this document and will bring it back either to approve as revised or possibly present new revisions of their own.

All parties appear to be in consensus that a procedure for hiring the Chancellor separate from the one that is used for hiring other administrators is appropriate and advisable. Two of the Trustees visited the Chancellor’s Cabinet while it was discussing the proposed AP and had expressed some concern about the hiring committee being able to subvert the hiring process for their own purposes; and conversely the constituent groups held the same concerns about the Board. In the revised version that was presented to the Board, provisions with checks and balances were included to address these concerns.

In the selection and evaluation of the College president, the Board does not have a separate policy. The position is included within the category of management. BP 7120 establishes the Management Employee Hiring Policy, and AP 7120-4 establishes the procedure for management employee hiring (11.1). Currently the Administrative Guide Policy 2002 (11.1) dictates the evaluative procedures to be followed for all management personnel, including the President of the College. At the time of this writing, BP 7240 establishes the management structure within the District and the terms and conditions of their employment, including contract and salary provisions (11.1). AP 7240-7 is under construction and will provide for the evaluation procedures to be followed for all management personnel, including the President of the College and the Provost of School of Continuing Education (SCE).

Self Evaluation These policies and procedures clearly delineate the Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

At this time, there is no compelling reason for changing BP 7120, AP 7120-4, or BP 7240.

Planning Agenda None. 2. The president has primary responsibility for the quality of the institution he/she leads. He/she provides effective leadership in planning, organizing, budgeting, selecting and developing personnel, and assessing institutional effectiveness. 2.a. The president plans, oversees, and evaluates an administrative structure organized and staffed to reflect the institution’s purposes, size, and complexity. He/she delegates authority to administrators and others consistent with their responsibilities, as appropriate.

Descriptive Summary The President is the chief executive officer and has full authority to manage the College and serve as liaison between the District and the College. He participates in developing District policies and procedures and makes recommendations on College issues related to finance, personnel, and policy. The President executes and administers contracts under authority of the Board and keeps the Board informed about the financial condition and needs of the College (11.1). He is responsible for the efficient use of existing institutional resources 255

and the creation of new resources. He is responsible for the formulation of all reports as may be required by the Board and by local, state, or national agencies. He oversees and evaluates the College’s administrative structure, which is modified as fluctuations occur to needs and resources. Changes are largely to enhance efficiency or are due to budgetary considerations.

Planning Agenda None. 2.b. The president guides institutional improvement of the teaching and learning environment by the following:

◊

establishing a collegial process that sets values, goals, and priorities;

◊

ensuring that evaluation and planning rely on high quality research and analysis on external and internal conditions;

◊

ensuring that educational planning is integrated with resource planning and distribution to achieve student learning outcomes; and

◊

establishing procedures to evaluate overall institutional planning and implementation efforts

Self Evaluation The current President assumed his position on July 1, 2007 (11.8), after more than 15 years of experience at the College, first as a dean, and more recently as Executive Vice President for Educational Programs and Student Support Services. In Fall 2007, a re-structuring of top-level administrators was implemented (11.9 & 11.10). A significant change was made when responsibility for planning was shifted from the Vice President of Educational Support and Planning to the Director of Institutional Research and Planning. The vice president’s title was also changed to Vice President of Administrative Services to encompass all matters related to budget and finance as well as campus support services. In doing this, the previous position of Director of Budget and Finance was eliminated, which resulted in significant savings to the College. Three top-level administrators report directly to the President. They are the Executive Vice President of Educational Programs and Student Support Services, the Vice President of Administrative Services, and the Director of Institutional Research and Planning. These three administrators comprise the President’s Staff, which meets at least weekly to discuss campus issues. Each administrator has extensive expertise in higher education. Together they provide outstanding vision and direction while serving as valuable resources to the President. When appropriate, the President delegates responsibilities to these and other managers, encourages their involvement in campus decision making, and is supportive of their efforts (11.35). The President and his staff promote teaching, learning, and student success through innovative approaches to basic skills development, transfer programs, career technical programs, workforce development programs, and student support services. He assures that educational programs comply with Board policies as well as state and federal statutes.

256

Descriptive Summary The President actively communicates institutional values, goals, and directions both on and off campus. He does this in many ways, which includes wide distribution and posting on campus of the 2008-2011 Strategic Plan (11.11). He participates on a number of District committees, including Chancellor’s Staff, the District Planning Council, and the District Curriculum Coordinating Committee, where he represents the goals and needs of the campus and also attends and speaks at Board meetings to keep the trustees informed of campus events and issues. On campus, he chairs the President’s Advisory Cabinet (PAC), which deals with campus planning and policy matters (11.12). Membership on PAC includes representation from all campus constituencies, which allows for constituent input in campus decision making and provides the President with a means to communicate with constituencies. Members of these committees are responsible for carrying information to and from their constituents. Opening Day presentations at the beginning of Fall and Spring semesters provide an opportunity for the President to address the state of the College and other issues affecting the College (11.13). In addition, he provides for and participates in campus-wide forums on Cypress College

budget updates, holds a Leadership Team meeting each semester, meets regularly with the Academic Senate President, and chairs the campus Diversity Committee, Management Team, and the Deans and Directors Team. The President meets with newly hired faculty and classified staff during their orientation meetings and attempts to instill an understanding of the College’s vision, mission, and values with new employees. The President also meets with the Academic Senate at the beginning of each semester and also when issues arise where the interaction would be beneficial. The President guides the institutional improvement of the teaching and learning environment by maintaining a clear strategic goal for the College. With the expansion of the Office of Institutional Research to include Planning, the President encourages the director’s involvement in campus settings where planning can be linked to other functions such as budget allocations. The director is a member of President’s Staff, President’s Advisory Cabinet, Planning and Budget Committee, Accreditation Self Study Committee, Institutional Effectiveness Task Force, Student Learning Outcomes Core Team, Deans and Directors Team, Management Team (11.14), Leadership Team (11.15), Basic Skills Committee, and District Planning Council. As a result, the director is in a position to keep the campus informed on a wide variety of factors where research is critical. He is also able to glean from those groups additional areas that need research for campus improvement. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning is located within the main administration building, which facilitates frequent interaction between the Office of Institutional Research and Planning and the President. Daily communication occurs in person or via phone/email so that the director can consistently provide the President with data that affects the day-today operations of the College. In addition to assessing campus undertakings, the President is also involved in reviewing the work involved in the development of student learning outcomes, the program review process, the Curriculum Committee’s proposals and the Planning and Budget Committee’s allocation of funding in relationship to the Strategic Plan.

Self Evaluation Besides ensuring the implementation of statutes and Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

Board policies and procedures, the President efficiently manages resources and implements priorities. He effectively articulates campus needs to the District and communicates the District’s interests and priorities back to the campus community. He also assures a climate of participatory governance and collaboration with internal constituencies and promotes a campus climate that respects and values the diversity, dignity, and contributions of all people. The results of a Campus Climate Survey completed in Spring 2008 indicated an increasing number of respondents agreeing that constituency groups work collaboratively towards the achievement of College goals (11.28). A majority of respondents in the survey also agreed that there are meaningful opportunities to participate in sharedgovernance activities, and that ideas and opinions are encouraged and given appropriate weight in matters of institutional decision making. The President is an active participant in College committees, Foundation activities, and community outreach events. This allows him to monitor the relationship between institutional research and planning and the aspects of student learning and resource allocation.

Planning Agenda None. 2.c. The president assures the implementation of statutes, regulations, and governing board policies and assures that institutional practices are consistent with institutional mission and policies.

Descriptive Summary The President assures the implementation of statutes, regulations, and governing Board policies and assures that institutional practices are consistent with the institutional mission and policies. The President serves as the chief executive officer of the College and is responsible for the integrity of all College activities. In this capacity, the President is required to be knowledgeable and conversant with federal and state statutes pertaining to the College as well as with District policy, procedures, and practices. Serving as the principle liaison between the College and the District, the President provides ongoing oversight to assure that institutional practices align with District policies. In addition, the President is charged with assuring that the College’s 257

institutional practices are aligned with its mission, vision, and policy directives. The President receives and distributes information via email to constituent leaders or presents it at management and shared-governance committee meetings. As constituent leaders receive information, they are expected to distribute it to their groups for discussion and feedback. The President’s Office also serves as a conduit between the campus and District for specific information on items requiring District or Board approval.

Self Evaluation The President meets regularly with the senior staff and Management Team to ascertain if there are any problems. The President also ultimately assures that all personnel, facility requests, and budget requests go through appropriate approval processes on campus. The President also assures that others on campus are aware of all policies. He participates in a new manager’s orientation to develop an awareness of policies, and managers are assigned mentors similar to the process for new faculty mentoring. Although this is effective, there are slight variations as needs and personnel changes fluctuate, so it remains a work in progress. The President receives information from the state Chancellor’s Office and Community College League of California and distributes it to the Planning and Budget Committee (PBC) and President’s Advisory Cabinet (PAC). He also attends weekly Chancellor’s Staff meetings where he advocates for campus needs, receives additional budgetary information, and distributes it to managers. He maintains an open-door policy to discuss new budget developments and works daily with President’s Staff to make sure that budget information is widely distributed. All campus funding requests go through a campus-wide planning and prioritization process. The President, as well as PBC and PAC, are guided by the Educational Master Plan, Student Services Master Plan, and Strategic Plan when setting priorities. The President receives funding recommendations from PBC and PAC and considers constituent feedback before making decisions about expenditures. On rare occasion, the President makes a decision contrary to a recommendation from PBC and PAC because of limited funding and a critical need for a broader benefit to the campus or for health, safety, or security reasons.

258

Planning Agenda None. 2.d. The president effectively controls budget and expenditures.

Descriptive Summary The President is ultimately responsible for the integrity of the College budget, including allocations and expenditures. This charge includes responsibility for assuring that those allocations and expenditures are appropriately supportive of the primary mission of the College and student success. He is in frequent communication with the Vice President of Administrative Services, the Director of Institutional Research and Planning, and the Vice Chancellor of Finance and Facilities to obtain current information related to College budgets and allocation needs. The President monitors all major expenditures and approves all travel requests, and the President’s Staff reviews budget requests, including those for regular and hourly personnel, on a weekly basis. The Planning and Budget Committee (PBC) serves as the primary recommending body to the President’s Advisory Cabinet (PAC) on general budget and planning issues. For one-time funding proposals, PBC ranks proposals based on merits, safety issues, and priorities from direction committees (11.11). PBC conveys to PAC the views of the campus community on matters relevant to College budget and planning. After receiving and discussing PBC recommendations, PAC makes funding recommendations to the President.

Self Evaluation The President works consistently with managers to convey the importance of monitoring their budgets. Given the economic shortfall affecting the District, it is significant that the President has led efforts at Cypress College to serve record numbers of students within the College’s budget.

Planning Agenda None. 2.e. The president works and communicates effectively with the communities served by the institution.

Cypress College

Descriptive Summary The President serves as the chief community spokesperson for the College. He serves on a number of local community committees, including local Chambers of Commerce, philanthropic organizations such as the Rotary Club, and community-based YMCA’s. The President is also mindful of the need to maintain effective dialogue and partnerships with the local civic and public sector communities. He is a regular attendee of city governance events, particularly State of the City addresses by our local city mayors. He maintains effective working relationships with the superintendents and principals of local high school districts. This partnership is validated each year in the annual Superintendents/Principals Breakfast hosted at the College each October. In addition to his personal involvement locally, the President has also continued with and strengthened connections to the community amongst the management staff. Managers of the College have assignments as representatives to local Chambers of Commerce. Instructional and Student Services deans serve as liaisons to local area high schools. By maintaining these personal connections to the community, the College is kept abreast of local issues while advancing the local image and standing of the College. The maintenance of these relationships has proven to be of significant importance.

Self Evaluation The President is a member of the Anaheim Family YMCA Board of Directors and the Cypress Rotary Club. He regularly attends meetings and functions and is also a member of several local Chambers of Commerce. The President is often invited to speak at gatherings and frequently brings in Cypress College staff to be guest speakers on various topics. He also takes the lead in encouraging specific managers to serve as liaisons for surrounding communities. The President represents College interests as a member of the Cypress College Foundation Board of Directors. He regularly attends Foundation functions to help develop and support fundraising efforts. Every Fall the President hosts a breakfast meeting for high school superintendents and principals to update them on current happenings at the College and receive their feedback about things the campus can do to help Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

their graduating seniors be successful college students (11.16). Each Spring the President and Foundation host a Business and Community Leaders Forum for local business and community leaders (11.17). A panel of experts is invited to speak about current issues affecting business and the College. For example, in 2010 the forum was titled “Can Your Business Survive A Disaster?” A panel of experts gave presentations about planning for disasters. The forum provided valuable information that addressed concerns impacting community safety, employment, and the local economy. The forums are an effective way of discussing issues of concern to the community while introducing community leaders to the resources and needs of Cypress College.

Planning Agenda None. 3. In multi-college districts or systems, the district/system provides primary leadership in setting and communicating expectations of educational excellence and integrity throughout the district/system and assures support for the effective operation of the Colleges. It establishes clearly defined roles of authority and responsibility between the Colleges and the district/system and acts as the liaison between the colleges and the governing board. 3.a. The district/system clearly delineates and communicates the operational responsibilities and functions of the district/system from those of the colleges and consistently adheres to this delineation in practice.

Descriptive Summary The North Orange County Community College District (NOCCCD) adopted a District Strategic Plan in June of 2006 (11.18). This document defines the District vision, mission, and values. In addition, the Plan specifies the following:

◊

An NOCCCD Strategic Plan that includes a District vision, mission, values, institutional goals, strategies, and key performance indicators

◊

A District Annual Plan with strategic targets that drives the annual budget of the District 259

◊

A participative planning process and resulting documents that are initiated by the Board of Trustees and Chancellor, further developed by the Chancellor and college leadership, widely reviewed for feedback by District stakeholders, and implemented by the District and colleges

◊

A future requirement and means for aligning the Colleges’ planning processes, goals, strategies, and budget with those of the District

In addition, the North Orange County Community College District Functional Map (11.29) delineates the institutional responsibilities within the District. Key stakeholder representatives, including College faculty, staff, and students, are expected to be familiar with their roles and responsibilities in accord with the District governance structures. These representatives are responsible for disseminating information consistent with governance processes — both College and District level — including decision-making processes and levels of responsibility. The delineation of responsibilities is reviewed and revised following the District planning cycles.

Self Evaluation Cypress College is fortunate to operate in an environment of significant support and autonomy from the Board. Due to clearly defined roles, responsibilities, and expectations as indicated in the Descriptive Summary above, the College has developed effective strategies and structures to support the primary mission of student achievement and success while operating within the context of a multi-college district. The College President conveys to the Chancellor information from the College that is relevant and necessary to the support of the College mission. This information is subsequently conveyed by the Chancellor to the Board. Chancellor’s Staff meetings are the formal mechanism for this exchange. These regularly-scheduled meetings are also used as forums for the Chancellor to provide direction and feedback from the Board to the College President. In addition to regular meetings between the presidents/provost and the Chancellor, the College President is also given the opportunity at regularly-scheduled Board meetings to share information directly 260

with the Board about the successes and challenges of College programs and activities. This provides elected Board members with the opportunity for direct interaction while maintaining and respecting the operational administrative structures of the District. When issues arise out of these conversations, the Chancellor is charged with follow up and coordination of effort with the appropriate college president/provost.

Planning Agenda None. 3.b. The district/system provides effective services that support the Colleges in their missions and functions.

Descriptive Summary The District provides a broad array of services in support of the College mission. Among these services are:

◊

Enrollment planning and coordination

◊

Budget planning, allocation, and oversight

◊

Information services

◊

Human Resources

◊

Public information coordination

◊

Purchasing

The District Planning Council (DPC) is the primary forum for the sharing of District information related to budgets, enrollment, and facilities planning. The College is well represented on this body, as well as at the various District level planning meetings where information and issues are presented. In order to provide for assessment of effectiveness of system services, various feedback mechanisms are in place, each representing what is appropriate for the particular area of activity. For example, in the area of technology, District-level communication takes place during bi-weekly meetings that include District personnel representing Human Resources, Finance and Facilities, and Information Services. At these meetings, concerns and needs are communicated from all entities of the District. Committee members collaborate to resolve issues that affect the entities of the District.

Cypress College

Self Evaluation In a broad sense, when the colleges have concerns, their voices are heard at various District meetings such as DPC, Chancellor’s Cabinet, Chancellor’s Staff, and the District Curriculum Coordinating Committee. Issues of concern can also be given voice at regular meetings of the Board of Trustees, where the trustees encourage free and open exchange. District services are evaluated internally but do not engage in system-wide analyses with regard to the effectiveness of support for the College mission

Planning Agenda None. 3.c. The district/system provides fair distribution of resources that are adequate to support the effective operations of the colleges.

Descriptive Summary The revenue allocation model utilized by the District is historical and based in significant part upon FTES generated by the sites. Most of the College revenue comes via this mechanism.

Self Evaluation Though a variety of different funding options have been discussed at DPC, no substantive changes to the allocation model have been adopted. The District Office of Finance and Facilities initiated a revue in 2007 of costs by site per FTES in order to address Cypress College’s concern that it was under funded due to the cost of maintaining expensive career technical education programs at a level that is disproportionate in comparison to the other District entities (11.34). Though the data were collected and discussion ensued, no change to the fundamental resource allocation model was proposed. The District funding model does not take into account institutional differences or individual needs. Because the lion’s share of College funding is based upon FTES, the Colleges and the School of Continuing Education will continue to compete for limited resources based upon their ability to increase enrollment.

Planning Agenda None. Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

3.d. The district/system effectively controls its expenditures.

Descriptive Summary Board Policies 6200, 6250, and 6300 (11.1) articulate and explain the financial mechanisms of the District. Tentative budgets are submitted to the Board in June, with the final budget approval typically occurring in September of each academic year. Quarterly financial reports (11.19) are submitted to the Board of Trustees and to the State Chancellor’s Office. The District utilizes an approval process requiring requests for expenditures and all budget transfers over $10,000 to be reported to the Board. A variety of documents demonstrate District control over finances and funding, including annual audit reports (11.20), annual budget reports (11.21), actuarial reports (11.22), and listings of budget transfers contained in the Board agendas (11.5). In addition, the District conducts an annual independent audit of its finances (11.20). The most recent audit revealed that the District is in good financial health. The District typically ends each year with a positive ending balance consisting of an operational reserve, the Board’s discretionary fund, and campus carryovers. The District Planning Council (DPC) is charged with developing allocation recommendations regarding District programs and services and forwarding those recommendations to the Chancellor for consideration by the Board of Trustees. DPC, in formulating recommendations, takes into account the mission of the California Community Colleges, the District Strategic Plan, data relevant to the needs and demands of the community the District serves, goals and objectives developed by the budget centers, and other factors deemed relevant to the planning process. DPC is chaired by the Chancellor and is constituted of members representing the constituency groups of each of the entities of the District.

Self Evaluation The District remains fundamentally sound financially even though the state economy and community college funding have diminished. The District continues to realize the benefits of having successfully passed Measure X in March 2002 (11.23). This measure resulted in a bond of $239 million for facilities construction, improvement, and expansion. Information regard261

ing both the Facilities Bond itself and recent updates are available on the District website (11.30). The eight member Citizen’s Oversight Committee oversees Measure X audits and compliance. Reporting to the Board of Trustees, the Committee is comprised of representatives of business, community members, support groups, and students. District staff members may not serve on the Committee. As the current construction cycle comes to completion, the District is engaging in a new Educational and Facilities Master Plan project that will result in the establishment of a roadmap of educational and facilities needs and priorities for the next ten years. This project is being coordinated by the District with significant College participation and control (11.31). The District’s Retiree Health Benefit costs continue to escalate. Current actuarial studies place the liability at approximately $70 million. Each year, the District spends approximately $4 million out of its operating budget to pay Retiree Health Benefits. This represents an increase in annual expenditures of almost $2 million as compared to the information reported in the previous accreditation self study. As health care costs continue to escalate, the District will experience an increasingly burdensome financial obligation. Discussions are ongoing at the District level — involving representatives of the constituent groups — to fairly and appropriately address the need to fully fund this obligation. The District has engaged in a collaborative effort with the colleges and the School of Continuing Education to address budget reductions that are consistent with individual institutional needs. The fundamental guiding principal established by DPC as the District has addressed reductions is to maintain jobs and student access to the extent possible while operating within the budget. The sites have been afforded great latitude to identify reductions consistent with individual resources, needs, and priorities. As the District addresses the need for reductions in expenditures, concerns over appropriate levels of staffing continue. Classified staffing levels were reduced in the last budget downturn and have not been increased since that time. The College is now downsizing to even lower levels and holding vacant positions unfilled in order to reduce expenditures. The District was also successful in renegotiating its Faculty Obligation Number to a 262

level more in line with system-wide norms. As District revenue has decreased, workload measures have also decreased. However, College enrollment has increased due to significantly improved productivity measures. The College continues to monitor expenditures related to enrollment in order to provide the greatest possible level of access for students within the confines of the dollars it is allocated.

Planning Agenda None. 3.e. The chancellor gives full responsibility and authority to the presidents of the colleges to implement and administer delegated district/ system policies without his/her interference and holds them accountable for the operation of the colleges.

Descriptive Summary Full authority and responsibility are given to the presidents of the colleges by the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees as evidenced in BP/AP 3100 and articulated in job descriptions for college presidents of the District (11.1). While the President is granted collegelevel authority, in a multi-college district, the President reports to the Chancellor. BP 2430 delegates authority to the Chancellor the executive responsibility for administering the policies adopted by the Board and for executing all decisions of the Board requiring administrative action. Section 1.1 of this policy authorizes the Chancellor to delegate the administration of District colleges and centers while retaining ultimate responsibility for those delegated powers and duties. In addition to providing leadership to the College, the President is responsible for addressing initiatives as directed by the Chancellor, including initiatives emanating from other District-level officers as appropriate to the mission.

Self Evaluation The District structure significantly empowers the Presidents to act in accord with the best interests of his organization. At the same time, the President serves as an executive officer of the District, reporting directly to the Chancellor. The issue of the appropriate balance between campus autonomy and District control is a matter of ongoing discussion at the District Planning Cypress College

Council. In addition to DPC, other District planning bodies provide forums for constituent representatives to express concerns when representatives from the campuses perceive that District control is impacting local decision-making processes. An example of this ongoing discussion is provided in DPC minutes (11.24) reflecting constituent concerns that the Chancellor’s Staff was inappropriately intruding in campus prioritization of faculty position allocations. The discussion provided a forum for the expression of concerns and re-affirmation of the College right to determine which programs would receive allocations of full-time faculty positions.

Planning Agenda None. 3.f. The district/system acts as the liaison between the colleges and the governing board. The district/system and the colleges use effective methods of communication, and they exchange information in a timely manner.

Descriptive Summary College-level matters with District-level impact are presented to and discussed at the Chancellor’s Staff and the District Planning Council. The District acts as liaison between the colleges and the governing Board. Representatives of the colleges are also appointed to positions and attend all Board meetings, providing for direct communication with Board members. Several standing committees consist of representatives from the District, the two colleges and the School of Continuing Education. Among these are Chancellor’s Cabinet, DPC, Banner Steering Committee and the District Curriculum Coordinating Committee. The boards of the different unions — United Faculty, Adjunct Faculty United, and CSEA — also have representatives from the different sites. Each of these bodies provide for individuals to share local perspectives. Each January, there is a joint meeting of the academic senates from the three District entities, United Faculty, and Adjunct Faculty United. This meeting provides a forum for the representatives of the different entities to share and to understand the concerns and positions of the other major faculty organizations. Trustees and administrators throughout the District are invited and regularly participate in the annual meeting. There are Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

also a number of ad hoc and informal interactions that take place between District sites. Site representatives charged with common responsibilities, such as Staff Development, often meet to share concerns related to their areas. It is common for deans and faculty members at Cypress College to informally interact with their counterparts at Fullerton College, particularly where curricular issues are concerned. Ongoing weekly meetings involving site and District representatives coordinate the multitude of facilities and operations issues within the District. Among these regularly-scheduled coordinating meetings are the Budget Managers meetings held on the Tuesdays of Board meetings, twice monthly District-level construction and facilities meetings chaired by the Vice Chancellor of Finance and Facilities, and periodic District level meetings to coordinate disaster response efforts. Although a multicollege district is large and complex, the implementation of these processes typically results in clear, effective, and timely communication. Information comes to the College on a regular basis regarding significant Board discussion items and actions. Immediately after each meeting of the Board of Trustees, the District Director of Public Affairs disseminates the Board meeting newsletter News from the Board of Trustees. Complete and detailed minutes of current and prior meetings are archived and available on the shared campus server (11.32, 11.33). The Chancellor makes both regular contact at the Fall Opening Day and in summer letters and periodic contact when issues arise.

Self Evaluation In general, administration, faculty, and support staff are well informed regarding District-level issues. Administrative staff members regularly attend Board meetings and report back to the deans and managers where Board actions impact their areas. The President of the College emphasizes the importance of these representatives sharing information with constituents, including managers, faculty members, and classified staff.

Planning Agenda None. 3.g. The district/system regularly evaluates district/system role delineation and gover263

nance and decision-making structures and processes to assure their integrity and effectiveness in assisting the colleges in meeting educational goals. The district/system widely communicates the results of these evaluations and uses them as the basis for improvement.

Descriptive Summary The District engages in an annual review of the Strategic Plan status, with the Colleges and SCE also providing their assessments for inclusion in the report that is presented to the Board. Other District effectiveness assessments occur on an ad hoc basis as issues of effectiveness arise in the relevant arenas. These ad hoc assessments are typically in the form of concerns raised at the relevant planning bodies regarding the effectiveness of decision-making structures and processes.

These external reviews validate the effectiveness and accuracy of the reporting mechanisms.

Self Evaluation With the exception of the annual review of the District Strategic Plan, other assessments of effectiveness in this area are dependent upon constituent representatives raising issues and concerns on an ad hoc basis. Neither DPC nor Chancellor’s Cabinet engage in a regular and rigorous review of effectiveness. Though District processes and procedures are generally perceived to be effective in assisting the colleges in meeting educational goals, regular and formal review of effectiveness is not currently an ongoing process of District planning bodies.

Planning Agenda

DPC and Chancellor’s Cabinet include representatives from Cypress College, Fullerton College, the School of Continuing Education, representatives of the constituent groups, and other members of District staff. Issues can be raised by any of these representatives regarding District processes and procedures, which are subject to discussion and revision as a result of this dialogue.

None.

As noted earlier, the Board of Trustees conducts an annual assessment of its own performance and makes the results of that assessment generally available. At each Board meeting, resource table representatives have an opportunity to address the Board regarding any issues related to the District’s decision-making structure and procedures. Representing the District Management Group, the three Senates, the two collective bargaining units for the full-time and adjunct faculty, and the collective bargaining unit for the classified staff, these individuals have the opportunity to comment either on general conditions or specific actions. In addition, time is devoted during each Board meeting for public comments regarding District matters.

11.2

Several of the District’s offices are evaluated by external agencies. The Office of Finance and Facilities must undergo an annual audit (11.20); any findings or exceptions are reported publicly and must be addressed. District Information Services are required to report significant data across the spectrum of District activities to the State Chancellor’s Office. Any failure to do so would result in immediate feedback from the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office.

11.8 North Orange County Community College District descriptive flyer for Cypress College President, July 2007

264

Reference Documents 11.1 NOCCCD Board Policies, Administrative Procedures and Administrative Guide — www.nocccd.edu/Policies/PoliciesAndProcedures.htm Education Code §70902 et al.

11.3 California Code of Regulations, Title 5, §51004 et al. — www.cccco.edu/Portals/4/Executive/ Board/2010_agendas/jan_10/Procedures_and_ Standing_Orders_2010_(1).doc 11.4 Procedures and Standing Orders of the Board of Governors, Art. 3, §331 et al. 11.5 Board of Trustees Meeting Agenda, Minutes and Archives — www.nocccd.edu/Trustees/MtgMinutesArchive2009.htm) 11.6

Cypress College Server (J: drive)

11.7 2009 Assessment of the Board of Trustees — April 2009

11.9 BP/AP 3100 Organizational Structure includding Cypress College 2009-10 Organizational Chart 11.10 President’s Advisory Cabinet Minutes – 12/06/07 and 12/20/07 — J:\President’s Advisory Cabinet 11.11 2008-2011 Cypress College Strategic Plan —www.

Cypress College

cypresscollege.edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/ pdocuments.aspx 11.12 President’s Advisory Cabinet Guidelines – Rev. 9/17/09 — J:\President’s Advisory Cabinet 11.13 Cypress College Opening Day Agendas — 20072010 11.14 Cypress College Management Team Agendas — 2007-2010

11.32 News from the Board of Trustees — www.nocccd. edu/Trustees/NewsFromBofT1011.htm 11.33 Board Meeting Minutes — www.nocccd.edu/Trustees/MtgMinutesArchive2010.htm and J:\Board Agenda 11.34 District Quarterly 11.35 Organizational Structure (Found in Introductory Documents of this Self Study)

11.15 Cypress College Leadership Team Agendas — 2007-2010 11.16 College High School Superintendents/Principals Breakfast Agendas — 2007-2010 11.17 Cypress College Business & Community Leaders Forum Agendas — 2007-2010 11.18 District Strategic Plan — www.cypresscollege.edu/ about/InstitutionalResearch/pdocuments.aspx 11.19 NOCCCD CCSF 311Q — www.nocccd.edu/Departments/FandF/FinanceFacilities.htm 11.20 NOCCCD Annual Audit Reports — www.nocccd. edu/Departments/FandF/FinanceFacilities.htm 11.21 NOCCCD CCSF 311 Annual Report — www. nocccd.edu/Departments/FandF/FinanceFacilities. htm 11.22 NOCCCD Actuarial Report, 2009 — www.nocccd. edu/Departments/FandF/FinanceFacilities.htm 11.23 NOCCCD Board Agenda [Containing Measure X Approval; Exec. Admin. Aide to Chancellor] 11.24 District Planning Council Minutes, February, 2010 — J:\Chancellor’s Cabinet District Planning Council Summaries-Minutes 11.25 DPC/Chancellor’s Cabinet Minutes — J:\Chancellor’s Cabinet District Planning Council SummariesMinutes 11.26 Board Assessment Summary, Trustee Responses 11.27 Board Assessment Summary, Resource Table & Audience Responses 11.28 Campus Climate Survey — www.cypresscollege. edu/about/InstitutionalResearch/rsurveys.aspx 11.29 NOCCCD Functional Map (Found at the end of Introductory Documents section of this Self Study) 11.30 Facilities Bond — www.nocccd.edu/Departments/ FandF/FacilitiesBond/FacilitiesBondInfo.htm 11.31 District Educational and Facilities Master Plan

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

265

Summary of Planning Agendas After reviewing the planning agendas suggested by the subcommittees, an evaluation was made to differentiate between on-going activities and future planning agendas. Similar items were merged and duplications were eliminated to arrive at the following list of nine items.

1. Evaluate the effectiveness of the College’s programs and services to determine their impact on success of various student groups. The findings will be used to develop, modify, and/ or continue services that best serve the college’s evolving diverse student population.

2. Develop ways to improve information dissemination among various employee groups on campus with the ultimate goal of improving participation, providing the rationale behind decisions, and expanding opportunities to engage in the decision-making process.

3. Develop and implement a process in TracDat that clearly establishes the link between Student Learning Outcomes (SLO) and Administrative Unit Outcomes (AUO) assessment results with program review, planning and budgeting, as well as align them with strategic directions in order to improve student success.

4. Develop and evaluate a method based on mapping the course SLOs to GE & Basic Skills PLOs to assess the GE outcomes.

5. Collaborate at Chancellor’s Cabinet to complete the development and adoption of an appropriate and effective educational program development and educational program dis-

Institutional Self Study — Spring 2011

continuance policy as directed in AP 2510.

6. Improve efficiency of the technological infrastructure and adoption process by working with instructional units to research and maintain a bestfit list of products as needed and resources allow.

7. Identify and address training needs to improve use of technology by faculty, administrators, staff, and students.

8. Promote activities that will engage employees and students from diverse groups, that will advance a supportive climate, and that will encourage the meaningful consideration of a variety of perspectives and opinions.

267

Institutional Self Study â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Spring 2011

269

N ORANGETHORPE

9200 Valley View St. Cypress, CA 90630 (714) 484-7000 CypressCollege.edu

KATELLA

405

CYPRESS COLLEGE

BEACH BLVD.

605

VALLEY VIEW

LINCOLN

Cypress College is located near the intersection of Valley View Street and Lincoln Avenue. Entrances to the campus are available from Valley View and Holder streets and on Orange Avenue. Entrance Streets are named Cypress College West, Cypress College South and Cypress College East. College Circle Drive is a one-way street, circling the campus in a counter-clockwise direction.

270

Cypress College