Planning Cycle and Use of Results
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Planning Cycle and Use of Results

on

  • 576 views

Presentation by Dean of Institutional Research and Program Review Chairperson

Presentation by Dean of Institutional Research and Program Review Chairperson

Statistics

Views

Total Views
576
Views on SlideShare
556
Embed Views
20

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

1 Embed 20

http://college.lattc.edu 20

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Planning Cycle and Use of Results Planning Cycle and Use of Results Presentation Transcript

    • Program Review & Planning Cycle Use of Results
      • Presented to the
      • Planning & Budgeting Committee for Evaluation
      • Office of Institutional Effectiveness
      • January 26, 2010
    • Accreditation
      • New Era on Accountability
      • ACCJC strengthen the Accreditation requirements.
      • 22 Colleges on Sanction as of January 2009
      • Deficiencies Causing Sanction
          • Program Review – 16
          • Planning, Using Results - 21
    • LATTC - Recommendation 2
      • “ In order to meet the standards, the college develop and fully implement an integrated planning process that clearly links program review, all aspects of human, physical, technology and fiscal planning , and resource allocation in a cohesive and inclusive manner.
      • Development of the model should be based on prevailing best practices that include a clearly established and calendared cycle, use of current and relevant internal and external environmental data, analysis of data to inform planning, a committee review process, linkage to resource allocation, and evaluation of the implemented plan.”
    • New Cyclical Process Old Process
    • Program Review & Planning at All Levels
    • Program Review &Planning for All Areas
    • Regulation
      • Title 5 regulation says that every program should undergo a program review at least every 6 years. CTE programs every 2 years.
    • Different Timing of Program Review & Planning Cycles and Their Alignment
    • Meta-Analysis
    • Comprehensive Program Review & Planning
      • Periodic comprehensive reviews are important to
        • to assess the effects of changes that were implemented
        • to set new goals for improvement
        • to align those goals with institutional goals & priorities
      • Modules/ Sections
        • Mission and Vision
        • Effectiveness - Enrollment Trends
        • Technology Change
        • Etc.
      • Each module includes sections on
            • Data
            • Analysis
            • Validation
            • Changes proposed/ implemented
    • Example of Comprehensive Modules
      • Mission & Vision
      • Program Effectiveness
      • Departmental Engagement
      • Professional Development
      • Environmental Scan
      • Vocational Programs
      • Instructional Support: Technology
      • Instructional Support: Services
      • Clubs, organizations and special activities
      • Learning Outcomes
      • Curriculum
      • Facilities
    • Validation of Comprehensive PR & P
      • Each module is evaluated by a theme committee
          • Mission & Vision => College Council
          • Enrollment Trends => Enrollment Management Committee
          • Technology => Technology Enhancement Committee
          • Etc.
      • Each theme committee develops a recommendation list for each program.
          • These recommendations are expected to be addressed or acted upon by a program on an annual basis.
    • Annual Program Review & Planning Components
      • Address the previous recommendations /validations
          • Narrative on what changes have been made
          • Indicating status: complete or in progress
      • Learning Outcome
          • Assessment
          • Use of Results
          • Changes Implemented
      • Goals
            • Objectives/Actions
              • Resource Requests
    • Goals
      • Linked to
          • Strategic / Master Plan
          • Learning Outcomes
      • Connection to Planning
    • Examining 2 different approaches to the Comprehensive PR & P Cycle
      • Staggered by Program
          • PR per program is done every 4 years , lottery based
          • A program does all the sections of the comprehensive PR on its scheduled year
          • Goals, SLOs, and recommendations addressed annually
      • Modular Cycles
          • Each module/section presented with different cycle
          • Each year only 2-3 modules are being addressed by all programs
          • Goals, SLOs, and recommendations addressed annually
    • Staggered by Program
      • Pros
        • The PR process on the campus is ongoing
        • Validation committees have fewer documents to review
        • Several campuses are implementing this PR model
        • The college committees approved the process/calendar
      • Cons
        • The PR process is not ongoing per department
        • Very extensive process for faculty & chairs
        • Validation committees have to review lengthy documents
        • Several campuses have abandoned this approach
        • The college planning cycles are not consistently linked
        • Managing the college PR process becomes challenging
    • Modular Cycles
      • Pros
        • Every department/division on the campus works on PR continuously
        • The college planning process is synchronized
        • Institution-wide use of PR results becomes more relevant
        • Not as extensive for faculty & chairs
        • Validation committees have shorter documents to review
        • The college PR process becomes more manageable
      • Cons
        • No current data/evaluation of this approach has been documented
        • This will be a new approach to the PR process at Trade
        • Needs approval process; time sensitive for accreditation
    • Q & A
      • Your input is valued
        • Please bring or send all your pros and cons concerning both approaches to the meeting
        • Please bring your questions to the committee meeting
        • Please call if you have questions/concerns