Academic Program Review and Action Planning – YEAR ONE

Division / Math and Science/Biology
Program / Allied Health & Biology
Contact Person / Carlos Enriquez
Date / March 15, 2011

Section A – Data Review and Analysis

I.Basic Success and Equity (Data from 3 previous years)

  • What trends are you seeing over time? How does the basic success data compare to the college as a whole and to statewide average success rates, if available? What might explain the differences?
  • What courses in your discipline show the greatest/least amount of success? What accounts for success in these courses? How could you improve success in the less successful areas?
  • What do you see in the comparisons between men and women and between different ethnicities? What accounts for differences? What concerns you? How could you strategically address the concerns?
  • What inferences can you draw from the data correlating the highest level of Math/English completed and success in your discipline's courses?
  • If you have online/hybrid/telecourse/CD-ROM courses, do the success rates differ from the same courses offered on-campus? If so, should the success rates be the same, why are they different, and is this a cause for concern? What areas of inquiry does this raise about online/hybrid/telecourse/CD-ROM courses?

Explain:
The available student data are very heterogeneous. The number of students withdrawing, succeeding, or not succeeding varies widely between genders, and among ethnicities. In addition, the number of students enrolled varied also from semester to semester, and from course to course. Therefore, the available data should be interpreted with caution.

The greatest success in biology courses, as assessed by average numbers, corresponded to BIOL 2B, MICR 1 and PHSI 1; and the least success to BIOL 31, and BIOL 50. ENSC 10, and ENSC 11. All courses in the discipline are at or above the average college success rate of 66%, except for BIOL 31 and BIOL 50.
Success appears to be related to courses in which enrolled students had already succeeded in prerequisite science and mathematics courses. In contrast, students enrolled in BIOL 31 or BIOL 50 do not require any previous science or mathematics courses. To improve success in the courses showing the least success it may be necessary to assess students in their science and mathematics skills and knowledge, or set prerequisite science/mathematics courses before they may enroll in a biology course.
An observed trend was the higher number of women enrolled in biology courses, averaging of 65% of the total enrolled students. This may be in part associated with a larger number of women pursuing allied-health careers. The average success rates between men and women were 60 and 65%, respectively. This difference is difficult to compare because of the number difference between the two groups of students.
Among ethnic groups, African-American students had the lowest success rate with an average of 49%, followed by Latino students with 55%, Filipino students with 60%, Asian students with 71%, and White students with 76%. Other ethnic groups had a variable average success rate, but their numbers were too low to draw representative numbers. The success rate differences observed among different ethnic groups may reflect the different socioeconomic conditions of these groups. Census poverty data show similar ethnic trends.
With the exception of PHSI 1 and MICR 1, success rates in biology were consistently higher among students who had taken English courses. The difference was more apparent among students taking BIOL 31, BIOL 50, and ENSC 11. These results seem to reflect an improvement in students taking lower level biology courses and who took English courses as well; however, the success rate difference was minimal between BIOL 31 students who did or did not take English courses.
Both ANAT 1 and PHSI 1 were offered face-to-face and online/hybrid/telecourse/CD-ROM in the fall of 2009. Students who took ANAT 1 offered on-campus had a success rate of 82%, as opposed to 58% among students who enrolled in the online ANAT 1 course. The difference in success rates is largely due to very high numbers of withdrawls in the hybrid sections.The difference in success rates is largely due to very high numbers of withdrawals in the hybrid sections. In contrast, no obvious difference was observed among students who took PHSI 1 online/hybrid/telecourse/CD-ROM or on-campus with success rates of 76% and 74%, respectively. BIOL 50 was offered both in hybrid format and on-campus in Spring 2009. This course also showed a large difference in success rates, this time with the on-campus class having lower success rates (34 versus 63%) with 28% non-success (versus 11%) and 38% withdrawals (versus 26%). Campus-wide data indicates that while success rates for online/hybrid courses is on par with on-campus classes, their withdrawal rates are very high. Our data, for some courses, reflects this trend. This leads to the question, which needs to be investigated at both the course level and campus level of how we can reduce the withdrawal rate for online/hybrid courses?

II. Course Sequence (Data from 2 previous years)

Note: Answer this question if you have been provided data about course sequences in your discipline.

  • Is success in the first course a good indicator of success in the second course? What are the curricular, pedagogical, and/or methodological implications of what you see?
  • Do your successful students in the first course enroll at a high rate in the second course within two years? What are the implications of what you see?

Explain:
The success rates of students in the next level course is high:
•85% from BIOL 31 to ANAT 1
•93% from BIOL 31 to MICR 1
•93% from ANAT 1 to PHSI 1
•92% from BIOL 2A to BIOL 2B
These data may reflect the fact that students who have been successful in a previous biology course have acquired prerequisite knowledge, developed more effective studying habits, and become accustomed to a community college environment. The interpretation of the data may be limited by numerous variables like population size, gender, and ethnicity.
However, the number of students enrolling in the next level course within 5 semesters is not as high as we would like it to be:
•54% from BIOL 31 to ANAT 1
•30% from BIOL 31 to MICR 1
•65% from ANAT 1 to PHSI 1
•62% from BIOL 2A to BIOL 2B
Why are successful students not enrolling immediately in the next level course?

III. Course Review (Data from 5 previous years)

  • Ed. Code requires that all courses are updated every five years. Are all of your courses updated? If not, do you want to maintain or continue these courses? Please indicate your plans in terms of curriculum. Have all of your courses been offered recently? If not, why? Are students counting on courses to complete a program or major when these courses are not being offered?

Explain: All Biology courses are up to date

IV. Budget Summary (Data from 3 previous years)

  • What budget trends do you see in your discipline? What are the implications of these trends?
  • Where is your budget adequate and where is it lacking? What are the consequences on your program, your students, and/or your instruction?
  • What projected long-term (5-10 years) budget needs do you see? You will detail your short-term needs in the action plan that follows. You do not need to cite them here.

Explain:
The supply budget for Biology remained at $20,000 for several years. During that time, the number of sections offered rose from 67 sections in 2000-01 to 109 sections in 2006-07; during the same period, the number of students being served rose from 1,726 in 2000-01 to 2,693 in 2006-07, the 2006-07 budget increased to $34,000 and the 2007-08 budget grew to $36,000. The increased budget made better laboratory exercises offered to the students, but there were limitations on the type of exercises, and often the students had to work in relatively large teams shearing limited resources.
The requested supply budget for Biology 2008-09 was $51,611. We estimated that approximately $57,000 was needed for academic year 2009-10; however, the biology subdivision received only $39,500. Various promises and proposals have been made to augment the budget, but each year we deal with uncertainty regarding funding. In addition, since most biology courses consistently are overenrolled, available resources have to be shared by more students than experiments are designed for. This chronic under funding undermines our ability to plan and perform many lab exercises that would increase student engagement, learning, and success, particularly in those related to modern laboratory techniques. A long-term projection of budget should consider the implementation of state-of-the-art laboratory exercises in biotechnology and medical sciences to better prepare our students to meet the labor needs of corresponding industries. Based on previous funding and inflationary factors, the Biology subdivision estimates that a budget of approximately $59,300 may be necessary in a fiscal year 2011-2012 to fulfill the Subdivision’s teaching goals. Additionally, the total amount allocated each year needs to reflect the 5-10% annual increase in prices for consumable materials.
The supply budget for ANAT 1 is $260 per section or $3,640 for 14 sections. Due to budget cuts, only 70% of the $3,640 is allocated to purchase organ dissection supplies/specimen, slides, and tools. The reduced amount has put a significant strain on the program’s ability to sustain quality teaching and student learning. According to ANAT 1 CLO 1, “students will demonstrate competency with standard equipment and techniques of the biological sciences.” The competency with standard equipment and techniques include microscope skill and dissection skill. After assessing all anatomy sections, the instructors agree that the student’s microscope skill met the achievement goal with an average of 3.5/4. However, the student’s dissection skill did not meet the achievement goal. It did not meet the target of an average of 2.5/4. The anatomy students are able to use the microscope competently because each student has its own microscope to use. They don’t have to take turns to learn how to use the microscopes. However, 2-4 students usually share one preserved specimen (i.e. heart, brain, and eye). Only one or two students have the chance to dissect while the rest watch. Large numbers of students sharing the preserved specimen does not allow all students to develop competent or accomplished dissection skill. The anatomy instructors agree that one preserved heart or brain specimen is appropriate for a pair of students and one preserved eye specimen for each student for dissection is necessary to improve the outcome for CLO1. To improve CLO1 outcome, 7 extra pails of preserved hearts, 7 extra pails of preserved brains, and 28 extra pails of preserved eyes have to be purchased each year for 14 sections. The additional preserved specimen needed per section will increase the cost per section from $260 to $372 or $5,208 for 14 sections.
Cadaver dissection is an integral part of the anatomy class - students develop their dissection skill on the new cadaver when they are available. Despite requesting two cadavers each year, funding has only been available to purchase one cadaver per academic year. This results in only half of the anatomy students having a chance to practice dissection techniques with the cadavers. According to ANAT 1 CLO 1, students will demonstrate competency with standard equipment and techniques of the biological sciences. The competency with standard equipment and techniques include microscope skill and dissection skill. After assessing all anatomy sections, the instructors agree that the student’s microscope skill met the achievement goal with an average of 3.5/4. However, the student’s dissection skill did not meet the achievement goal. It only scored 2.5/4. The anatomy students are able to use the microscope competently because each student has its own microscope to use every semester. But students cannot develop dissection skill on a dissected cadaver. To improve CLO1 outcome, 2 cadavers should be purchased per academic year to give all anatomy students a chance to build and improve their dissection skill. In addition to the need to purchase 2 cadavers, the transport and disposal fee of the cadaver has increased over the years, the cost for each cadaver is now $3,000 instead of $2,700.
Facilities and Equipment
Finally, the Biology building (2100) was built in the 1960s. It fulfilled its purpose well, but it has become outdated. Modernization or replacement of this building is important for safety purposes and for functionality. Some laboratories in building 2100 lackrequired safety features like sprinklers, eyewash stations, and safety showers. The cadaver room was adapted from a room not designed for cadaver lab work and lacks proper ventilation. The functionality of the current building is compromised by the limited storage space for student microscopes, book bags, and lab coats. Some laboratories require a vacuum source, which is available only in a few labs of the building. To meet biology course demands, a new building would require, in addition to standard teaching lab components, a greenhouse and a cadaver room with proper ventilation. Plans for a new building were included in our most recent facilities master plan, and it was slated for the final phase of the current bond. However, due to construction cost increases, the replacement of building 2100 was cut. It was submitted again to the state, but the state turned down matching funds. We have received some technological upgrades, such as LCD projectors, but these to not address our current safety issues or the need for modern experimental lab set-ups.

V. Enrollment Data (Data from 2 previous years)

  • Please provide a brief description of: overall enrollment trends; enrollment trends by course; and enrollment trends by time of day and Saturday.
  • Describe what your discipline has done in terms of curriculum or scheduling in the last two years that has effected enrollments.
  • Describe plans or strategies that you have for the near future in terms of curriculum or scheduling that could impact your enrollments.
  • Lastly, look closely at whether the schedule you currently offer provides access to the broader community that your discipline serves at Chabot College—day time, night time, Saturday, distance education, special or targeted communities that would or do enroll in your courses.

Explain:
The enrollment in biology courses does not show a particular trend; however, all courses have a high demand and are consistently overenrolled. In fact, at the start of every semester most biology instructors have to deny admission to a significant number of students.
BIOL 10 enrollment overtime has shown a constant increased number of enrolled students with an average per semester of about 110%. BIOL 10 offers classes daytime, afternoon and nighttime.
Both BIOL 2A and BIOL 2B enrollment also has exhibited an increased number of students with an average enrollment of approximately 105% and 102%, respectively. Most BIOL 2A courses have been offered in the afternoon slots; while BIOL 2B during both morning and afternoon times. The time slots in which these two courses can be offered is limited by classroom space and by the chemistry & physics schedules.
Both daytime and afternoon time BIOL 31 classes have been regularly overenrolled, with enrollment averages of 112%, nighttime classes of BIOL 31 have had a good enrollment with an average of about 97%.
BIOL 50 has been typically overenrolled, with an average of 113% for the on-campus classes. The hybrid BIOL 50 classes have shown a similar enrollment pattern. This course is offered mostly in the afternoon.
The enrollment in ANAT 1 was more than 110%. The course has been offered classes daytime, afternoon and evening as well as in hybrid format. (Data collected by the anatomy instructors shows a huge number of students being turned away – 100 in Spring ’11 (data for 6/6 sections), 86 in Fall ’09 (data for 4/6 sections), 46 for summer ’09 (data for 2/2 sections), 100 for Spring ’10 (data for 5/6 sections.)
ENSC 10 and ENSC 11 had average enrollments of approximately 112%. ENSC has been available morning and afternoon; whereas ENSC 11 daytime. Online ENSC also had a higher enrollment of about 112%.
Both MICR 1 and PHSI 1 had a high enrollment of near 115%. These courses had been available daytime, afternoon, and evening. PHSI 1, in addition, has been scheduled in hybrid format.
We have maintained overenrolled courses for many years, despite the additional workload on instructor and the additional wear and tear on the equipment. Because our sections have been reduced in recent semesters, we are turning away more students than we have in the past. Course reductions already taken:
ANAT 1 (2010-11) – 6 sections in fall, 6 sections in spring, 2 sections in summer; reduced from 8 sections in fall, 8 sections in spring, 3 sections in summer
Most biology courses are available at daytime, afternoon, and evening. In order to improve the access to all biology courses, more sections need to be opened of courses with fewer sections like BIOL 2A, BIOL 2B, BIOL 50, ENSC 10, and ENSC11, which are offered at limited times only.

VI. Student Learning Outcomes Inventory