This document discusses the program review and planning cycle at LATTC and options for improving the process. It notes that LATTC received an accreditation recommendation to fully integrate program review, planning, and resource allocation. Two approaches are examined: a staggered program review by program every 4 years, or using modular cycles where all programs address 2-3 sections each year. The modular approach may better synchronize the college planning process and enable more relevant use of program review results, though it would be a new process requiring approval and time to implement. Input and questions are solicited on the pros and cons of each approach.

1. Program Review & Planning Cycle Use of Results Presented to the Planning & Budgeting Committee for Evaluation Office of Institutional Effectiveness January 26, 2010

2. 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

3. 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.”

4. New Cyclical Process Old Process

5. Program Review & Planning at All Levels

6. Program Review &Planning for All Areas

7. Regulation Title 5 regulation says that every program should undergo a program review at least every 6 years. CTE programs every 2 years.

8. Different Timing of Program Review & Planning Cycles and Their Alignment

9. Meta-Analysis

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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.

13. 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

14. Goals Linked to Strategic / Master Plan Learning Outcomes Connection to Planning

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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