TABLEOFCONTENTS€¦ · Page 17-22 Kahikoluamea Counselors (Developmental education for math and English, and First Year Experience) Page 23-25 Targeted Populations Counselors/Coordinators&

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Academic Program Counselors

Pages 2-4 Business, Legal, Technology (BLT)

Culinary (CULN)

Health Sciences/EMS and Nursing

Honda International Center (HIC)

Pages 5-7

Pages 8-10

Pages 11-13

Pages 14-16 Hospitality (HOST)

Page 17-22 Kahikoluamea Counselors (Developmental education for math and English, and First Year Experience)

Page 23-25

Targeted Populations Counselors/Coordinators

Disability Services Office (DSSO) Pages 26-31

Pages 32-33

Pages 34-38

Pages 39-40

Pages 41-45

Pages 46-48

Kuilei Outreach Program (High School Outreach Program)

Military Veterans Program (MVP)

Native Hawaiian Career and Technical Education (NHCTE)

Single Parent-Displaced Homemaker (SP-DH)

TRiO Student Support Services (TRiO)

1

Maida Kamber Center for Career Exploration, Transfer and Graduation Services (MKC, serving the Arts and Sciences Program)

04/25/14 ab

Summary of Assessment and Closing the Loop Program Name Business, Legal and Technology Counseling Assessment Academic Year

2013-2014

Report Date May 1, 2014 Author/s Cynthia N. Kimura, Professor/Counselor

SLOs: • Students will be able to increase their understanding of resources available and increase their comfort level in college

Guiding Questions Response Means of Assessment and Criterion for Success

1) What were the specific assessment tools used?

A survey was used at the end of the fall 2013 Business, Legal and Technology (BLT) Welcome Reception to assessment the SWiBAT. The participant show rate was very low 18 out of 131 invitees

2) What is the criterion for success? Did you reach it?

Based on survey results, 70% of student respondents will be competent (Competent= “agree” or “strongly agree” to 6 or more questions). Criterion for success was reached with 100% or respondents competent. Based on survey results, 100% of student respondents seemed to increase understanding of resources available and increase comfort level in college after attending the Welcome Reception.

Analysis of Data Collected

3) Summarize the outcomes, means of assessment and criteria for success. Include the program’s process for determining who participated in the assessment and the

Based on survey results, however, 100% of student respondents were competent (Competent=”agree” or “strongly agree” to 6 or more questions) and seemed to increase understanding of resources available and increase comfort level in college after attending the Welcome Reception. The Welcome Reception appears to be a successful means for “new” BLT majors to increase understanding of resources available and increase comfort level in college. Students enjoyed the opportunity to meet and mingle with instructors, learned from the STAR presentation, and felt more comfortable at school.

2

04/25/14 ab

sample size.

At the end of the Reception all students (18) attendees were asked to complete the Welcome Reception Survey. Fourteen (14) students submitted completed surveys. Though limited, the survey results indicated that after attending the fall 2013 Business, Legal & Technology (BLT) Welcome Reception the students felt more engaged and comfortable at school. Student comments indicated that students found talking with instructors, friendliness of professors, meeting instructors, STAR presentation, and the student/faculty panel most helpful.

4) What do the data tell us about this process in terms of goals, outcomes, and means of assessment; defined criteria for success; implementation process; and data collection?

The “Welcome Reception” was an appropriate intervention to introduce students to available resources and assess their comfort level in college. The use of a survey was an appropriate means to gather data to assess this SLO. Use of the survey also allowed for easy determination for criteria for success and data collection.

Use of Results

5) What do the data indicate about program improvement? What, if anything, needs to be done at the program level to improve student learning? What resources are necessary to accomplish this?

If funding is available explore additional marketing techniques and provide student incentives to attend. Also if the welcome reception is mandatory and resources are available for implementation; will need departmental faculty commitment and participation. Based on the survey data and student comments, we will continue to explore ways to increase student participation so more students will benefit from the Welcome Reception. We will also request peer mentors to be assigned to the BLT Kopiko Learning Community to further foster engagement from a student to student perspective.

6) What improvements have already been made?

In the spring 2014, peer mentors were assigned to the BLT Kopiko Learning Community. To increase departmental faculty commitment and participation, the academic program coordinators (accounting, information technology, marketing, and paralegal) and department chair were asked to assume coordination and marketing of the welcome reception.

7) Will the SLO remain the next academic year? Will the assessment/

With the Kapi’olani CC Student Affair’s coordinated SLOs, the Business, Legal and Technology; Culinary; and Hospitality (BLTCH) cluster agreed to assess the following:

3

04/25/14 ab

methodology remain the same?

PLG 1: Students will identify and implement a plan to achieve their educational goal(s). • SLO 1b: SWiBAT develop an accurate STAR academic plan (AY 14-15) • SLO 1d: SWiBAT effectively register for courses applicable to their educational goal

(AY 15-16) PLG 4: Students will be aware of campus and/or community resources/policies and engage in activities and services that fulfill their needs and interests.

• SLO 4a: SWiBAT identify resources (AY 13-14)

*Adapted from Building a Culture of Evidence in Student Affairs A Guide For Leaders And Practitioners, Editors, Marguerite McGann Culp and Gwendolyn Jordan Dungy

4

04/25/14 ab

Summary of Assessment and Closing the Loop Program Name Culinary Arts Assessment Academic Year

2013-2014

Report Date 4/30/14 Author/s Lori Maehara

SLOs: • SWIBAT increase understanding of resources available and increase comfort level in

college



A post-‐reception survey with 15 questions plus four open ended questions was given to FY students at the conclusion of the reception event. Optional “Go Forward! Agree to Degree” pledge forms were available, and approximately 80% of the FY students pledged.

2) What is the criterion for

success? Did you reach it?

A goal of 70% or higher of survey respondents answering either SA (Strongly Agree) or A (agree) was the target for each of the first 13 rated survey questions.

Based on the data obtained from the assessment survey completed by students after the fall 2013 welcome reception, at least 90% of survey responses fell into “Agree” or “Strongly Agree.” This level of achievement validated that the outcomes of the event were achieved.


3) Summarize the outcomes, means of assessment and criteria for success. Include the program’s process for determining who participated in the assessment and the sample size.

41 new fall 2013 Culinary Arts students attended the welcome reception and orientation, and 41 chose to complete the survey.

90.24% (SA + A) was the lowest rating, for the “I understand the purpose/utilization of STAR.” However, this is not a major concern, because FY students who enrolled in CULN 111 in fall 2013 had Peer Mentors do a STAR usage presentation, and CULN 111 instructor Kristie Fujimoto assigns students to complete STAR planner though the end of their academic goal. In addition, fall

5

04/25/14 ab

2013 was the first semester FY students were mandated to complete a minimum of 3 STAR Academic Planner semesters to be able to register for spring 2014, so FY students had access to additional STAR resources during their first semester.

A high of 100% (SA + A) was noted for two post-‐event survey questions:

*I know who my counselor is, and the help I can receive.* I understand my responsibilities as a student (advising, conduct).

Narrative comments:While only one student noted “Time” as the “Least helpful part of Today’s orientation” as a way to improve the event, the majority of FY students commented that the best part of the orientation was hearing the instructors speak about their careers and thus being more comfortable starting the fall semester.


The survey questions yielded data which was helpful for assessment purposes. Basically, the survey questions confirmed that first year students who attended the orientation achieved the outcome of gaining information on campus resources. In addition, the students reported feeling more comfortable beginning the fall term, as they knew who their CULN and FSHE instructors were. Comfort leads to student engagement. The survey data indicates that new fall 2013 students who attended the August 2013 welcome reception and orientation met the criteria for success for SLO 4a: SWiBAT identify resources. The welcome reception/orientation met the event’s outcome—that students who attended the event were able to identify resources.

Use of Results


The continued availability of Peer Mentor assistance even after the grant has ended, is important to continue CULN 111 STAR usage presentations. In addition, clerical help to assist in data assessment will allow me to revisit this SLO, and compare post-‐fall 2013 vs. post-‐fall 2012 student achievement such as GPA and retention from fall to spring.

If future welcome receptions are held, more time will be spent on ice breakers to allow more interaction with fellow first year students.

6) What improvements have already been

I will continue to work with the CULN 111 instructors to have Peer Mentors present on STAR’s usage. It is not a concern that a first year student who hasn’t even begun his/her first term does

6

04/25/14 ab

made?

not understand the utilization and purpose of STAR, because this is covered in detail in CULN 111.

7) Will the SLO remain the next academic year? Will the assessment/ methodology remain the same?

Student Affairs Assessment retreats in November 2013, with follow-‐up sessions in December 2013 and January 2014, resulted in the updated coordinated SLO:

SWiBAT 4a: SWiBAT (Student Will Be Able To) identify resources The new coordinated SLO which was updated in January 2014 is similar to the old SLO listed at the top of page 1 of this report, used by our BLTCH cluster, and meets the criteria for success determined at the retreats The Business/Legal, Culinary, and Hospitality counselors will assess in the coming three year cycle. Our cluster meets regularly (monthly while all four counselors are on duty) and we constantly discuss whether current assessment instruments and methodology are working. For now the assessment instrument and the methodology will remain the same. However, as noted during Student Affairs assessment retreats and meetings, assessment is dynamic and positive revisions can be made if we feel that making revisions will improve the assessment process.


7

Feedback on Summary of Assessment and Closing the Loop (based on Guidelines for Summary of Assessment & Closing the Loop) Program Name: Health Science/Nursing/EMS Report date: March 2014 Author: Wes Maekawa (Professor/Counselor, Assessment Leader) Date: May 1, 2014

SLOs: • Students will be able to synthesize information and make an informed decision toward a specific career pathway.



The aforementioned student learning outcome was assessed via the pre-‐health students’ participation in a program information session in order to learn more about a specific health academic program and its requirements relative to career ladder opportunities, admissions requirements, prerequisite courses, selection criteria, pre-‐admissions exam and program costs.

After participating in the program information session, pre-‐health students completed an evaluation survey that assessed their level of knowledge and awareness before and after the session, wherein the survey results revealed that students did increase their awareness and knowledge based on a rubric used to define if the students was “just getting started,” “basic,” “competent” or “advanced,” wherein most students indicated that they were “just getting started” before the session and at the “basic” level (if not higher) after the session.


The criterion for success was based on the student increasing his/her awareness of the health program requirements, ultimately progressing from one level to a higher level (e.g., Level 1 – Just Getting Started to Level 2 – Basic OR Level 3 – Competent to Level 4 – Advanced) as defined by the (four-‐level) rubric used within the Information Session Evaluation Form. Although not formally assessed as with the aforementioned criterion, other criteria used to informally measure success included the student successfully completing all of the admissions requirements (i.e., prerequisite courses and pre-‐admissions exam, if applicable, and all other program-‐specific requirements), while also accurately completing the health program application form and completing all of the application steps.

8



.. wherein the survey results revealed that students did increase their awareness and knowledge.

For the criterion that measured the students’ level of awareness of the health program requirements, the sample size included approximately 2,350 pre-‐health students, who participated in the health programs’ information sessions in the Fall 2012-‐Spring 2013. Among the participants, approximately 70 percent increased their awareness of the health program requirements by one level or more.


The data revealed that the information session is an effective venue for informing students of the health program requirements as well as assessing their level of awareness of these program requirements, since the level of participation remains consistently high and the student is able to self-‐identify the level of awareness before and after participating in the information session, ultimately providing immediate feedback on the effectiveness of the information session. The data also revealed that solid majority of students participating in the information session increased their awareness by one level or higher according to the rubric used for the session evaluation.

Use of Results


To further enhance the students ability to synthesize information and make an informed decision towards a specific career pathway, the application process for the health academic programs will be enhanced to include a “Health Careers @ A Glance” program profile sheet, which will provide additional information about each health academic program relative to its occupational cluster; the personal qualities required for the occupation; semester entry; application period; selection process; selection criteria; pre-‐admission exam; prerequisite courses; support courses; and credentials/credits. Using the “Health Careers @ A Glance” program profile sheet, students applying to the health academic program will be required to complete a “My Plan” (narrative) that describes their preparedness for the program relative to the aforementioned items as well as the their ability to commit specific hours of studying per week; pay for their education; confirm child care (if they have children); apply computer skills and have required computer access; as well as maintain balance with school, family and work.

No additional resources will be needed to implement the “Health Careers @ A Glance” program profile sheet other than advice from the KCC Web Team on where the information should be posted within the health program webpages within the KCC website. The “My Plan” narrative will be included within the health program application which will not require any additional resources other than the appropriate software program to create an applicant-‐friendly form that is form-‐fillable to expedite the completion of the application form.

9


The “My Plan” narrative has already been included within the application process for all Health Sciences and EMS programs, while the Surgical Technology Program (within the Nursing Department) has included the “My Plan” narrative within its application process. The Nursing Department plans to include the “My Plan” narrative within the Associate Degree in Nursing Program, LPN-‐RN Transition Program and Practical Nursing Program in the Spring 2015.

7) Will the SLO remain the same for 2012-13? Will the assessment/ methodology remain the same?

Given that the aforementioned SLO, the assessment cycle and the outcomes successfully focused on the pre-‐health students, the Health Science/EMS/Nursing Counseling Cluster has decided to address a different set of SLOs that will focus on the current health students, wherein the following SLOs will be assessed within the following cycle: SLO 1a – Current health student will be able to identify their education goal (to be assessed in Fall 2014-‐Spring 2015). SLO 1b – Current health students will be able to develop an accurate STAR academic plan (to be assessed in Fall 2014-‐Spring 2015). SLO 1c – Current health students will be able to identify the steps to transition to their next educational goal (to be assessed in Fall 2015-‐Spring 2016). SLO 1d – Current health students will be able to register for courses applicable to their educational goal (to be assessed in Fall 2015-‐Spring 2016).


10

Feedback on Summary of Assessment and Closing the Loop (based on Guidelines for Summary of Assessment & Closing the Loop) Program Name: Honda International Center Report date: March 2014 Author: Lani Suzuki-Severa (Professor/Counselor, Assessment Leader) Date: April 1, 2014

SLOs: • SLO 1: SWIBAT increase their awareness of campus resources to accomplish career and educational goals • SLO 2: SWIBAT understand their responsibilities in maintaining their F-‐1 student status. • SLO 3: SWIBAT develop a first semester academic plan. • SLO 4: SWIBAT increase cultural awareness for successful transition to US college system.



Between 2009-‐2011, we assessed all the learning outcomes for the ESOL 197 International Student Seminar using various evaluation instruments measuring both direct and indirect data. Every semester, a seminar evaluation was disseminated. The other instruments included F1 quiz, academic planning activity and career pathway activity.


Our criterion for success was reaching 85% competency on all SLO’s for our students. We achieved our goal by 2011.



See above sections 1) for means of assessment and 2 ) for criteria for success.

The assessment for all four learning outcomes outlined above was targeted to students enrolled in the ESOL 197 Intensive English Program. On average, the sample size was between 20-‐50 students depending on class enrollment.

11


The data tells us that our criteria for success (85% competency) was appropriate and the implementation process and means of assessment were effective in collecting the data that we needed. As a result, we closed the assessment cycle for ESOL 197 Seminar, and began to lay down the assessment groundwork for orientation programs for the next 2012-‐2014 cycle.

Use of Results


The data indicated the following: -‐We should communicate the SLO’s more clearly to students and program advisors. -‐ The need for more visual aides for this ESOL population to improve student learning, as well as making connections with the physical location of campus resources. -‐A laptop was necessary to utilize technology in the classroom of which became available since 2010.


Improvements made include: -‐Clearly communicating the SLO of developing a first semester academic plan to both students and program advisors -‐Utilizing more technologies and visual aides such as powerpoint to improve student learning about the US college system -‐Introducing web resources and office visits to increase awareness of campus resources -‐Incorporating quizzes to assess and improve student learning of student understanding of F-‐1 visa regulations


The SLOs and assessment/methodology remained the same for 2012-‐2013. HIC’s primary function is to help students to comply with F-‐1 student visa regulations and connect them with existing campus resources. Therefore, in response to the newly established counseling SLO’s in 2014, we chose the following two SLO’s reflecting our above core practices:

12

SLO 4a: SWIBAT identify resources SLO 4b: SWIBAT recognize college policies to facilitate their compliance with these rules Focusing on the above two SLO’s will help to strengthen and streamline HIC counseling programs and activities.


13

04/25/14 ab

Summary of Assessment and Closing the Loop Program Name Hospitality & Tourism Assessment Academic Year

2013-2014

Report Date April 30, 2014 Author/s Sheryl Fuchino-Nishida

SLOs: • Student will be able to increase understanding of resources available and increase comfort level in college



Surveys were distributed to student participants and completed immediately following the Hospitality & Tourism (HOST) department Welcome Reception. Survey questions enabled students to provide feedback regarding their current feelings and attitudes toward starting their college career at KCC. Questions #1-‐5 related to students’ understanding of resources, while questions #6-‐11 related to students’ preparation/comfort level in beginning college at KCC. Feedback was also solicited regarding what students found most and least helpful about the reception, and other comments and suggestions to provide an opportunity for participants to provide suggestions for future improvement.


Goal: 70% of participants would score at the “competent” level, which means that students ranked a minimum of 6 of the 11 questions as “agree” or “strongly agree”. Survey results reflected 100% of the students at the competent level.



Survey results reflected 100% of the students at the competent level. 100% of students rated each of the 11 questions as “agree” or “strongly agree” except for question #9 (33/35 or 94.2%, agreed or strongly agreed). Open-‐ended feedback reflected students finding value in all areas of the program. This exceeded our expectations and provided feedback that the reception is having the positive impact we were hoping for. The survey results indicate that the HOST Welcome Reception was successful in increasing students’ understanding of resources available and their comfort level in college. All new and transfer students majoring in HOST in fall 2013 were invited to attend the Welcome Reception. At the end of the formal portion of the reception, lunch was provided to all students and faculty. This provided an opportunity for further conversation in a relaxed, informal setting. Many students took the opportunity to ask me questions about course requirements, registration,

14

04/25/14 ab

classes, and preparing for the start of the semester. The evaluations were used as “lunch tickets” – students were asked to complete and submit the survey prior to getting their food. We received 100% student participation in survey completion.


The HOST Welcome Reception was an appropriate activity to introduce students to available resources and increase their comfort level in their transition to the College. The positive outcome of our assessment reflects the effectiveness of the activity to reach the goals set. Data collection methods were very successful resulting in 100% participation.

Use of Results


While the survey results didn’t identify specific areas for improvement, I plan to discuss changing the second open-‐ended question with the BLCH cluster counselors from asking about the “least helpful part of the reception” to asking for suggestions for improvement or what students would have wanted to have had included in hopes that it might solicit or encourage more suggestions.


One challenge of student participation is that the Honda International Center (HIC) often plans events for international students that conflict with our Welcome Reception. Being that the HOST department has a large international student population, we will work toward coordinating with the HIC faculty to eliminate activities scheduled simultaneously so that we may improve our student participation. We will also inquire about the dates for New Student Orientation (NSO) Pt. 3 and other activities that may be scheduled during the week prior to the start of school.


Because there is a direct connection from the old SLO (reported above) to the new SLO (SLO 4a), the assessment and methodology for this SLO will remain the same. In addition, to develop a more coordinated and comprehensive assessment for this new 3-‐year cycle, the Business, Legal and Technology; Culinary; and Hospitality (BLTCH) cluster has added two new SLO’s to address and assess students’ learning connected to the students’ educational goal. With the Kapi`olani Community College Student Affair’s coordinated SLOs, the Business, Legal and Technology; Culinary; and Hospitality (BLTCH) cluster agreed to assess the following:

15

04/25/14 ab

PLG 1: Students will identify and implement a plan to achieve their educational goal(s).

• SLO 1b: SWiBAT develop and accurate STAR academic plan (AY 14-‐15) • SLO 1d: SWiBAT effectively register for courses applicable to their educational goal (AY

15-‐16) PLG 4: Students will be aware of campus and/or community resources/policies and engage in activities and services that fulfill their needs and interests

• SLO 4a: SWiBAT identify resources (AY 13-‐14)


16

04/25/14 ab

Summary of Assessment and Closing the Loop Template Program Name Kahikoluamea Counseing Assessment Academic Year

2012 - 2013

Report Date May 1, 2014 Author/s Kristie Malterre

SLOs: Intervention #1: College Student Inventory (CSI) Students will be able to (SWiBAT): SWiBAT #1:

• Identify what they have learned as a result of meeting with the counselor for their CSI interpretation. SWiBAT #2:

• Identify what they will now be able to do (next steps) with their awareness.

Intervention #2: Holomua I Ke Ola SWiBAT:

1. Be aware of how to fund their college education. 2. Be aware of how to get involved in Hawaiian cultural activities on campus. 3. Be aware of their vision and goals and how to get there. 4. Be aware of their values, skills, and interests. 5. Be aware of some of the careers and majors that might be a good fit for them. 6. Be aware of the support services and resources at KCC. 7. Create social connections with other at KCC. 8. Stay motivated in college 9. Use ‘Imiloa – MyPlan for college planning. 10. Use STAR and other resources to successfully plan. 11. Feel connected to the land, my spirit, and myself. 12. Maintain balance in their life. 13. Know where to go for their academic and learning needs. 14. Know how to connect with their program/major advisor. 15. Know how to develop/maintain positive study habits.

17

04/25/14 ab



Intervention #1: College Student Inventory (CSI): Students answered open-ended questions after meeting with the counselor for CSI interpretation via an on-line survey link (using Google Forms). Intervention #2: Holomua I Ke Ola: On-line, web-based survey completed at beginning of semester and end of semester to assess learning/development outcomes as a result of participating in entire semester-long program (Google Form)


Intervention #1: College Student Inventory (CSI): Criterion for Success: Assessed students will have an averaged basic or above basic response/score rating of the two SWiBAT areas. Scoring rubric used: 3 – Competent: Student can clearly identify what they learned/what they are now able to do regarding their individual situation. 2 – Basic: Student has listed responses, but is vague in describing what they learned/what they will now do regarding their individual situation. 1 – Poor: Student is unsure or has not listed any learnings/next steps for their individual situation. Results of analyzing narrative responses and rating/scoring using rubric. Averaged responses/ratings are listed: Conclusion: Criterion for Success Met: • All cohorts assessed averaged basic or above basic ratings of the two outcome/SWiBAT areas. Intervention #2: Holomua I Ke Ola: Criterion for Success: A gain in program learning/development (L/D) outcomes are seen in examining results of pre and

18

04/25/14 ab

post tests taken at beginning and ending of semester. Conclusion: Criterion for Success Met:

• Gains were made in program learning/development (L/D) In examining pre and post tests taken at beginning and end of semester.



Intervention #1: College Student Inventory (CSI): Outcomes: Fall 2011 Cohort (high Native Hawn enrolled Eng 21, Eng 22): SWiBAT #1 Ave. Resp. = 2.2 SWiBAT #2 Ave. Resp. = 2.4 Spring 2012 Cohort (high Native Hawn enrolled Eng 21, Eng 22): SWiBAT #1 Ave. Resp. = 2.6 SWiBAT #2 Ave. Resp. = 2.8 Sum 2012 Cohort (Lunalilo Scholars): SWiBAT #1 Ave. Resp. = 2.4 SWiBAT #2 Ave. Resp. = 2.3 Spring 2013 Cohort: (participating Math 81, Eng 22 ALP) SWiBAT #1 Ave. Resp. = 2.6 SWiBAT #2 Ave. Resp. = 2.9

19

04/25/14 ab

Means of Assessment: Students answered open-ended questions after meeting with the counselor for CSI interpretation via an on-line survey link (using Google Forms). Questions are: SWiBAT #1: 1. As a result of meeting with the counselor, I learned that I….. SWiBAT #2: 2. I will now be able to…. Narrative responses were rated/scored using the rubric. Multiple raters were used to increase scoring reliability. Criterion for Success: Assessed students will have an averaged basic or above basic response/score rating of the two SWiBAT areas. How Determined Who Participated in Assessment and Sample Size: All students who met with a counselor after completing the CSI were asked to complete the on-line survey either in-office or after the appointment. Intervention #2: Holomua I Ke Ola: Outcomes: L/D Outcome# Pre Post #1 3.67 4.28 #2 2.95 4.44 #3 3.67 4.48 #4 3.98 4.36 #5 3.77 4.24 #6 3.57 4.36 #7 3.42 4.12 #8 3.89 4.44 #9 2.92 4.36 #10 3.22 4.20 #11 3.56 4.28

20

04/25/14 ab

#12 3.76 4.24 #13 3.52 4.48 #14 3.26 4.36 #15 3.63 4.32 Means of Assessment: On-line, web-based survey completed at beginning of semester and end of semester to assess learning/development outcomes as a result of participating in entire semester-long program (Google Form) Criterion for Success: A gain in program learning/development (L/D) outcomes are seen in examining results of pre and post tests taken at beginning and ending of semester. How Determined Who Participated in Assessment and Sample Size: As part of the structured set of activities, all students who participated in the program were asked to complete the pre and post test.


Data tells us that criterion for success was met with both Intervention #1 and Intervention #2. However, with both interventions, outcomes and learning indicators could be better refined and in the implementation and data collection process, consistency could be improved in order to obtain more data from students to assess their learning.

Use of Results


Data tells us that criterion for success was met with both Intervention #1 and Intervention #2. However, with both interventions, outcomes and learning indicators could be better refined and in the implementation and data collection process, consistency could be improved in order to obtain more data from students to assess their learning. Resources needed to accomplish the above include planning time and continued training and support in the development of outcomes, learning indicators, and data collection methods that align with and support our strategies to increase student learning.

21

04/25/14 ab

6) What improvements

have already been made?

Learning outcomes and rubrics were developed in alignment with Student Affairs, which helps to enhance our programmatic consistency and focus as we develop new strategies and as our counseling program evolves.


• No, the SLO will not remain the same next academic year. • No, the assessment/methodology will not remain the same.


22

Feedback on Summary of Assessment and Closing the Loop (based on Guidelines for Summary of Assessment & Closing the Loop) Program Name: Maida Kamber Center Report date: March 2014 Author: Sharon Fowler (Professor/Counselor, Assessment Leader) Date: April 1, 2014 SLOs:

● Students will be able to identify necessary requirements for graduation.



In the spring of 2012 we surveyed a random sampling of 300 students who voluntarily came into the Maida Kamber Center (MKC) for various reasons. The purpose of the study was to analyze their course selection for the current, in-‐progress term to verify if the students were taking courses that were leading towards the two main degree programs that the MKC supports: Associate of Arts – Liberal Arts Associate of Science – Three focus options (Life, Physical, Pre-‐Engineering)


Successful benchmark for measuring students’ ability to identify the necessary requirements for graduation was set at 75% of students being able to perform at the competent level. Competency was defined as all courses that a student was currently enrolled in were evaluated as appropriate and of value in completing requirements towards degree completion.



Of the 300 student sample size, 149 student records were eliminated from the study for various reasons stated in the original report which excluded them from being considered eligible for evaluation. Of the resulting 151 students who remained in the study group, we determined 86% of the sample group was proficient at identifying appropriate classes leading to the successful completion of their degrees.

As a result of assessing our performance as academic advisors though this study as well as anecdotal learning over the past three-‐year period, we have come to realize the following: - Students many times have a hard time understanding degree requirements and could benefit

from academic advising - It is critical for students to understand degree requirements for us to be able to graduate them

23

in as close as possible to 2-‐years - The earlier we start working with students on their two-‐year as well as baccalaureate

academic plans the better it is for the academic success of the student - We needed to educate students in a systematic approach to enable students to make informed

choices when it came to course selection.


- The data told us that the overwhelming number of students who came into the MKC were enrolled in courses that were of value in completing their declared major. In terms of method of assessment, it is not clear if the outcome of success was completely attributed to the efforts of the counselors meeting with the students, directly influencing the course selection,, or if the appropriate class selection was due to some other factor. Our criteria for success is the measurement of students enrolling in courses that will count towards moving them closer to degree completion. Our methods of data collection could also be reviewed in future studies as the pool of students we evaluated self-‐selected to come into the center for assistance and they may not be a true representation of the general population of Liberal Arts population at KCC.

Use of Results


The data indicates that students who have the initiative to seek out academic advising have a high degree of understanding the degree requirements, as measured by appropriate course registration. To improve student learning at a programmatic level there could be an initiative to bring in students who do not voluntarily come in for academic advising and evaluate their ability to select the correct courses towards degree completion. Upon evaluation of this data, create a program to seek out students who do not voluntarily seek academic advising in an effort to increase individual and institutional goals in decreasing time to graduate and increasing the overall number of graduates.


-‐In the fall of 2013 we partnered with the First-‐Year Experience (FYE) program to work not only on orientation advising for first-‐semester freshmen, but with mandatory academic advising to assist second-‐semester freshmen. We worked either one-‐on-‐one with students if they came to our office, or in groups referred to as “STAR Academic Advising” sessions. The purpose of these interactions was to assist our students who were completing their first-‐semester of college to plan for subsequent semesters. It provided us an opportunity to help explain baccalaureate degree requirements and how those requirements influence the classes you take in the community colleges. In February 2014 we participated in an all-‐day training at our largest transfer partner, the

24

University of Hawaii at Manoa (UHM). During the all-‐day training we met with 15 departments of the UHM and were trained on the various degree requirements. The training also allowed us to meet and develop a working relationship with the various advisors as a resource we can refer our students for questions concerning degree requirements and what classes may be completed at the community colleges prior to transfer. This training is intended to be an annual training.


This SLO is not due for evaluation in AY ‘12-‐’13. When we do evaluate this SLO in the future, a suggestion for modification would be to review students who we can verify came into the MKC the prior semester for advising and are continuing with us in the current semester. We would conduct the study similar to the study conducted for this evaluation, just include the element that these were students we advised prior to the current term to ensure that our advising played a factor in influencing what classes they registered for in the subsequent term. The reason for the change in format would be to try and attribute the accuracy or lack of accuracy to the addition of the counseling component.


25

Disability Support Services

Description

A. Official Name and Description of your Program including names of your staff members who contributed to this report. (This information will be used in all of our official documents including the KCC catalog.

Disability Support Services Office (DSSO): Kapi‘olani Community College (KCC) is committed to a barrier-‐free campus, ensuring that all students have equal access to education. KCC agrees to make academic adjustments to ensure non-‐discrimination of students with disabilities. This commitment is in accordance with applicable state and federal laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, and Sections 504 and 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. Online services and information can be accessed at http://kapiolani.hawaii.edu/object/dsso.html

Counselor Joselyn Yoshimura and Michaelyn Nakoa

How does your program mission support the Student Services mission?

B. Briefly describe which of the Student Learning Outcomes or Service Area Learning Outcomes are related to your program learning outcomes. Provide a summary of the results of your assessment and your program’s next steps in meeting your desired outcomes.

1. SNTWiBAT + complete+ all requirements for employment as a DSSO notetaker. Competency level is measured on a 4 point rubric, with 4 being competent, defined by-“Complete all Documents, training, without assistance and/or reminders within one week” *see rubric for all levels The DSSO Blue Employment Form outlines students progress through completing employment process and will be used as the measurement tool for this SLO. During Fall 2010- Spring 2011, there was a total score of 3.11, 61% at competency levels (4 and 3). During Fall 2011-Spring 2012 the total score was 2.99, with 36% at competency

26

levels (4 and 3) From these results, DSSO made improvements by re-staffing, training front staff to better emphasize importance of employment docs and started phone reminders. Re-Evaluation in Spring 2013 yielded the following results: 2.SNTWiBAT + comprehend+ the duties and responsibilities of notetaking. Competency level is measured on a 4 point rubric, with 4 being competent, defined by-“Earn of score of 100% on note taking training quiz”*see rubric for all levels The notetaking quiz is given as a part of the hiring process after completing the Notetaking training in person or through PowerPoint individually. During the Fall 2010-Spring 2011, the total score was 3.67, with 94% at competency levels (score 3 and 4). During the Fall 2011- Spring 2012 the total- score was 3.5, with 53% at competency levels (score 3 and 4). As a result, DSSO made the changes for improvement such as required notetakers to retake if quiz score was below 70% and re- do note taking training to emphasize missed items on quiz. Re-evaluation in Spring 2013 yielded the following results. 3. SWiBAT + identify+ their Disability Notice (DN). Competency level measured on a 2-point scale, Yes, defined as “Strongly agree” and “agree” and No defined by “Disagree” and “Strongly Disagree” on the counselor evaluation tool. Fall 12: 3.88 on 4-point scale. 40/40=100% Competent (YES) Sp/Sum 13: 3.66 on a 4 point scale. 38/38= 100% competent (YES) Fall13: 3.76 on a 4 point scale39/39= 100% competent (YES) The goal was 90% and was met. 4. SWiBAT + identify+ the accommodations they will receive through their Disability Notice (DN) 5. SWiBAT + comprehend+ their responsibilities and duties related to their accommodations Competency level for both were measured on a 2-point scale, Yes, defined as “Strongly agree” and “agree” and No defined by “Disagree” and “Strongly Disagree” on the counselor evaluation tool. Fall 12: 3.88 on 4-point scale. 40/40=100% Competent (YES) Sp/Sum 13: 3.76 on a 4 point scale. 38/38= 100% competent (YES) Fall13: 3.86 on a 4 point scale 29/29= 100% competent (YES) The goal was 90% and was met. 6. FWiBAT + identify+disability notice (DN). In spring 2013 a survey was sent to faculty who were sent Disability Notices that semester. Of the 97 respondents, 94, (97%) of faculty were able to identify that they received a DN. The goal was to achieve 90% identification level. This goal was met. 7. FWiBAT + comprehend+ disability notice (DN).

27

In spring 2013 a survey was sent to faculty who were sent Disability Notices that semester. Survey item #6: “Please rate your level of understanding of the following: Purpose of the Disability. Goal: 90% Item #6: Of the 97 respondents, 1 (1%) had “No” understanding, 2 (2%) had “minimal understanding”, 17 (18%) had “satisfactory” understanding, 37 (38%) had “good” understanding and 40 (41%) had excellent understanding. A total of 94 (97%) of the respondents had at least “satisfactory” understanding. The goal was to achieve 90% understanding level. This goal was met. 8. FWiBAT + comprehend+ their responsibilities and duties related to their DSSO students’ accommodations. In spring 2013 a survey was sent to faculty who were sent Disability Notices that semester. Two survey items were used to measure this outcome. Survey item #5: “Do you believe that the accommodations on the DN are mandatory? “Yes” or “No”. Goal: 90% Survey item #6: “Please rate your level of understanding of the following: Your roles and responsibilities in implementing classroom accommodations. Goal: 90% Results for Item #5 revealed that of the 97 respondents, 78, (80.4%) of faculty answered that “yes” they believe that the accommodations are mandatory. Results for Item #6 revealed that of the 97 respondents, 0 had “No” understanding, 8 (8%) had “minimal understanding”, 16(16%) had “satisfactory” understanding, 30 (39%) had “good” understanding and 35 (36%) had excellent understanding. A total of 89 (92%) of the respondents had at least “satisfactory” understanding. The goal was nearly met. Interventions in progress are:

ü Change the letter sent to faculty along with DNs to explain mandatory nature of DN and fulfilling ADA law.

ü Highlight faculty responsibility in fulfilling the accommodations at the New Faculty Orientation (NFO).

ü Provide workshops or online modules to inform faculty of their role.

C. Did your program accomplish the goals/recommendations from your last program review? (Address this question beginning with your second program review cycle.)

28

Results and Analysis of ARPD data

A. Indicate which ARPD data element(s) best addresses your program success or provide one from your own program area. If you select one from your own program area data, please describe how and when it was collected.

B. Number of Students Served by your program and Staffing Levels

2009-‐10 2010-‐11 2011-‐12 2012-‐13 2013-‐14 2014-‐15 No. of Students Served

Staffing Levels

Anticipated Staffing Needs

C. Does your staffing structure meet your program needs? Please discuss all aspects of your workload and what strategies have been used to improve your program services. Please also describe the negative staffing factors and how you have addressed them.

29

D. Number of Students Served by your program and Budgeting Levels

2009-‐10 2010-‐11 2011-‐12 2012-‐13 2013-‐14 2014-‐15 No. of Students Served

Budget Level

Anticipated Budgeting Needs

E. Does your budget level meet your program needs? Please discuss all aspects of your workload and what strategies have been used to improve your program services. Please also describe the negative budget factors and how you have addressed them.

Improvement Plan and Use of ARPD or program data

A. What do the results indicate in relation to your program goals? Please provide an analysis.

B. What changes or improvements do you plan to make within your targeted program over the next year based on your analysis of the data?

30

Next Steps – Planning for next year’s 2014 ARPD cycle

A. What are your next steps -‐ acting on the results. What changes if any will you make in your program to improve your achievement data? Who will do it and what resources do you need?

DSSO needs to re-‐assess the outcomes related to the faculty to determine if the interventions made an impact. Providing workshops, which is one of the interventions identified to increase faculty understanding of the accommodations and their role will require additional resources: tech support and time and effort allowed for this initiative. Without resources, DSSO can re-‐assess considering the other interventions and make future determination from that point.

Additionally, DSSO would like to align more with the Student Affairs mission and Program Leaning Goals by choosing 2 Student Affairs SLOS, 5a and 5b that are related to the current DSSO SLOs. DSSO also chose to assess a 3rd SLO 4c to better help students get the services and support they need. Planning to utilize resources on campus and in the community is essential to accomplishing the DSSO and Student Affairs mission. The change over to Student Affairs SLOs will allow DSSO to fulfill part of the Student Affairs Mission statement. It has been a challenge for the DSSO office to contribute significantly to the Student Affairs Mission since the services are directly related to compliance with the Americans for Disability Act (ADA). DSSO will assess the following SLOs in 2013-‐2016: SLO 4c SWiBAT develop a plan to utilize resources to fulfill their needs and interests SLO 5a SWiBAT identify a problem/need SLO 5b SWiBAT identify strategies and develop a plan to solve the problem/need The table below shows how the current DSSO SLOs align with the Student Affairs SLOs. DSSO SLO Student Affairs SLO SWiBAT + identify+ the accommodations they will receive through their Disability Notice(DN)

SLO 5a SWiBAT identify a problem/need

SWiBAT + comprehend+ their responsibilities and duties related to their accommodations

SLO 5b SWiBAT identify strategies and develop a plan to solve the problem/need

31

Feedback on Summary of Assessment and Closing the Loop (based on Guidelines for Summary of Assessment & Closing the Loop) addresses Targeted Populations ARPD Report areas: “Description C” & “Next Steps A” Program Name: Kuilei Report date: April 2014 Author: Sheldon Tawata Date: April 9, 2014 SLOs:

● SWiBAT identify the steps to transition to their next educational goal ● SWiBAT effectively register for courses applicable to their educational goal ● SWiBAT identify campus and community on-‐site and on-‐line resources



https://www.hawaii.edu/offices/cc/arpd/ http://www.hawaii.edu/iro/maps.php?title=High+School+Background+of+First-‐Time+Students


The impact of our services are assessed by the enrollment percentages of recent high school graduates attending KCC. Similarly to the overall KCC goals, we will also assess our impact from the persistence rates of these students from one academic year to the next.



We analyze the enrollment data to determine if our intervention strategies made an impact. Our target primary target group are students from our feeder high schools -‐ Farrington, Kaimuki, Kalani, Kaiser, McKinley, and Roosevelt. We look at enrollment growth from recent high school graduates who enroll at KCC.

4) What do the data tell us The increase in enrollment and disbursement of financial aid will be indicators of success.

32

about this process in terms of goals, outcomes, and means of assessment; defined criteria for success; implementation process; and data collection?

Use of Results


Assuming I’ll have my APT Band B in place, I plan on strengthening my relationships with KCC program directors/coordinators and high school administrators. I also plan on updating our outreach initiatives to be aligned with the needs of our feeder high schools and participating middle schools. I also hoping that the campus tours and Math Brush Ups will be off our plates to focus on our primary responsibilities.


Built a broader network that includes KCC program specialist and high school administrators.


Everything will remain the same so that we can better assess our progress and determine what needs to be changed. The overall goal of our program is to increase enrollment and financial aid disbursement with recent high school


33

Name(s)

Program Name

Florentino Abara Date 05/01/2014 MILITARY AND VETERANS PROGRAM

Academic Year 2014 -‐ 2015

Names of individuals who contributed to this report: Florentino Abara

Description

A. Official Name and Description of your Program. (This information will be used in all of our official documents including the KCC catalog.

B. How does your program mission support the Student Services mission?

C. (1) Outcomes. Briefly describe which of the Student Learning Outcomes or Service Area Learning Outcomes are related to your program learning outcomes. (2) Means of Assessment and Criterion for Success. What were the specific assessment tools used? What is the criterion for success? Did you reach it? (3) Analysis of Data Collected Summarize the outcomes, means of assessment and criteria for success. Include the program's process for determining who participated in the assessment and the sample size. What do the data tell us about this process in terms of goals, outcomes, and means of assessment; defined criteria for success; implementation process; and data collection? (Taken from Guidelines for Summary of Assessment and Closing the Loop document)

C. (1) For the academic year 2012-13 the Military and Veterans Program's SLO was "SWiBAT + successfully complete the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) application, 1990 paper version, or online version (VONAPP) to receive Certificate of Eligibility (COE)."

C. (2) MVP students submitted COE to the MVP office via, email, fax, or face to face. COE's were scanned and saved into the MVP database housed in the KISC server immediately after receiving it. In the initial assessment (Baseline conducted in Spring 2012), showed 45% or 121 students successfully completed the VONAPP and submitted a COE. The total competency score was 2.74 (Basic - Students picks up an application or goes to VONAPP website and ask questions about it) to include all levels. Although the MVP's goal it to have on file the COE for each student in the program, we felt the criterion for success would be to increase our competency score to 3 (Competent - Student submits an application but documents are missing) and increase the percentage of COEs in the database to at least 60%.

C. (3) In Spring 2014, data showed that 268 students used benefits and 90 % (242) (had previously submitted or turned in a COE prior to the start of the semester and only twenty-six (10%) did not. The total competency score increase to 3.73. MVP was able to achieve this success through various changes and implementation of programs and initiatives. These would include the following:

Moving to a larger office that allowed the MVP coordinator and school certifying official to be in the same office space Moving to a larger office space that allowed MVP to set up computers and have students complete VONAPP Moving to a larger office space that allowed MVP to set up a phone line that allowed students to speak to a VA representative Hiring of a student help Monitoring/Updating MVP student files Earlier hours to speak with VA staff in Muskogee, Oklahoma who are six hours ahead Hosting Information Sessions for MVP students (prospective and current) Creating an MVP support group Arranging Honolulu Vet Center to come to campus (once a month) and provide services to students Creating a checklist with the VONAPP website and instruction on how to apply for their COE Creating an MVP brochure Creating a calendar and using the internet to have student book appointments. Revising the Enrollment Certification Request Form (ECR) Setting up a Facebook and Twitter Account to share information Filming the admissions process to receive VA benefits and sharing it on Facebook and in the MVP office.

To provide services for the military service members, veterans, and dependents of veterans. These services include: • To ensure all eligible Veterans of the United States Armed Forces and their eligible dependents are informed of the Veterans educational benefits available through Kapi‘olani Community College. • To provide for efficient and orderly processes of application for and certification of Veterans educational benefits, the evaluation of all prior coursework from previously attended educational institutions, and the application of that coursework

to their current educational program as mandated by the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs. • Answer all related military questions such as Tuition Assistance, Kicker, and other similar benefits. • To adhere to all applicable federal laws, regulations, and policies. Florentino Abara (MVP Coordinator) Angie Ocampo (School Certifying Official)

34

D. Did your program accomplish the goals/recommendations from your last program review? (Address this question beginning with your second program review cycle.)



N/A

1. SWiBAT + successfully complete the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) application, 1990 paper version, or online version (VONAPP) to receive Certificate of Eligibility (COE). Students submitted COE to MVP office via, email, fax, or face to face. COE was scanned and saved into KISC server. Data was collected on September 25, 2013. Data sorted and analyzed on November 6, 2013.

35

B. Number of Students Served by your program and Staffing Levels 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011 2011 - 2012 2012 - 2013 2013 - 2014 2014 - 2015

No. of Students Served Fall 2011: 371 Spring 2012: 334

Summer 2012: 144 TOTAL: 819

Fall 2012: 373 Spring 2013: 309


Fall 2013: 336 Spring 2013: 325

Summer 2014: n/a TOTAL: 661

Staffing Levels 1 MVP School Certifying Official

1 Assigned Counselor

1 MVP Coordinator 1 MVP School Certifying

Official 1 MVP Student Worker

1 MVP Coordinator 1 MVP School Certifying

Official 2 MVP Student Workers


1 clerical staff 1 MVP assistant

coordinator/outreach


D. Number of Students Served by your program and Budgeting Levels 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011 2011 - 2012 2012 - 2013 2013 - 2014 2014 - 2015

No. of Students Served Fall 2011: 371

Spring 2012: 334 Summer 2012: 144

TOTAL: 819

Fall 2012: 373 Spring 2013: 309


Fall 2013: 336 Spring 2013: 325

Summer 2014: n/a TOTAL: 661

Budget Levels

$15,000 - Student Help $5,000 - Supplies

$15,000 - Student Help $5,000 - Supplies


36




The MVP office has improved in meeting program goals. Students are receiving information about completing the VONAPP application prior to the start of school. More importantly, data indicate students are completing the application. By completing VONAPP, VA sends the student a Certificate of Eligibility (COE) which identifies the program they are using (I.e. Post 9/11 GI Bill, Montgomery GI Bill – Selective Reserve, etc), the percent of benefits they are entitled to, and the length of time they have to use the benefits.

37


Next Steps -‐ Planning for next year's 2014 ARPD cycle

A. What are your next steps -‐ acting on the results. What changes if any will you make in your program to improve your achievement data and student learning outcomes? Who will do it and what resources do you need? What improvements have already been made? Will the SLO remain the same for 2012-‐2013? Will the assessment/methodology remain the same?

There are many changes that occurred to MVP that is of great concern. The MVP office was removed from 'Ilima 107 which was a secured and quiet location on campus for our Veteran students that housed three offices for the MVP coordinator, school certifying official, and confidential space shared with the MVP students, campus mental health counselor, and Honolulu Vet Center counselor. It also had a space for our student worker to meet and greet new MVP students, and allowed for a separate desk for MVP students to use a computer and separate phone line to communicate with VA representatives as well. It was conveniently located next to Admissions and Records, the Cashiers office, and the bookstore for our MVP students.

The MVP office is now located in the Ho'okele Center which is an open space shared with the First Year and Transfer Year Experience programs, Ku'ulei, Office of Student Activities, University of Hawaii Credit Union, three classrooms, Financial Aid Lab, Subway restaurant, and a large space for many students to lounge, play fooseball, and "hangout." The location is loud and filled filled with students (sometimes hundreds of students) which is problematic for our MVP students who have returned from deployment.

The curent location for MVP is a very small and does not allow for a confidential space for our students to speak with VA representatives. The location only has one office and forced the school certifying official to be housed separately from the MVP program,. It has made it difficult for the coordinator, student workers, and school certifying officials to work on student files simultaneously.

The next step is to find a better location on campus that will allow MVP to provide the services we were previously doing at our previous location. MVP would also like to hire another MVP staff member that would work alongside the current MVP coordinator. Responsibilities would be:

• to assist in office coverage • establishing a connection with military bases • participate in TAPS for active duty service members about to be discharged • develop, edit, and maintain social media • develop, edit, and create program information handouts and forms

Need to provide an outreach component to the MVP program. Possible ideas include attending military fairs and TAPS sessions on military bases and community fairs. Also improve communication by using the internet and other social media sites such as Facebook, Google Plus, and etc. The MVP office currently has one computer for students to complete the VONAPP. This computer is shared with the student assistant. At times, students have to wait their turn to use this computer to complete the VONAPP. A larger office space which will allow the MVP office to have two or more computers available would provide better service.

38

Summary of Assessment and Closing the Loop Template Program Name Kulia ma Kapi’olani, The Native Hawaiian CTE Project Assessment Academic Year

2013-2014

Report Date May 1, 2014 Author/s Rona Kekauoha

SLOs: • SLO #1: Eligible Native Hawaiian students who continued in the program from Fall 2013 to Spring 2014 • SLO #2: Native Hawaiian students who successfully completed a service learning, work experience, co-op or internship



SLO #1: Student enrollment in Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 was checked on STAR. SLO #2: Student enrollment in a pre-‐approved internship, practicum, clinical or co-‐op class, and their resulting grade was checked on STAR. Also, students had to fill out program paperwork if they received a stipend for their work experience so completed documents were also used.


SLO #1: Per grant guidelines, the target percentage is 83%. The actual performance data is 76% so we did not reach the target. SLO #2: Per grant guidelines, the target percentage is 95%. The actual performance data is 96% so we did reach the target.



SLO #1: This outcome focuses on retention. All the students officially enrolled in Kulia ma Kapi’olani who did not graduate were included in this SLO to determine if they stayed in school. 33 fit the criteria and 25, or 76%, achieved the SLO. SLO #2: This outcomes focuses on the number of students who had the opportunity to practice related work skills in a real world work environment. All the students officially enrolled in Kulia ma Kapi’olani who were registered in an internship/practicum/clinical course were counted in this SLO. 47, or 96% of the 49 eligible students achieved the SLO.

4) What do the data tell us about this process in

SLO #1: The goal of 83% is rather high, so while the target was not met, the actual performance is still very respectable. The means of assessment and data collection is very

39

terms of goals, outcomes, and means of assessment; defined criteria for success; implementation process; and data collection?

reasonable. SLO #2: Even though this goal is even higher than SLO #1, we were able to hit it. More commentary below in #5. The means of assessment and data collection is very reasonable.

Use of Results


SLO #1: Even though we provide peer mentoring, limited tutoring, stipend support, financial aid workshops, social events and community service opportunities to help keep students in school, sometimes situations occur that are out of our control and out of the students control and will negatively impact this outcome. Of the 8 students that didn’t continue on from Fall to Spring semester, half experienced “real life” situations that affected their ability to return to school (one student wanted to return home to Hawai’i Island, one had a partner who delivered a premature baby, one is raising a child with a disability, and one developed a health condition). We will continue to try our best to help all students stay enrolled using the support services and activities previously mentioned. SLO #2: Some of the reasons for success in this outcome include the competiveness and high expectations of these select admissions programs, the quality of the curriculum and the faculty that carry it out, and the strong relationships that have been established between KCC and the internship sites. Kulia provides stipend support while students are spending many hours in the classroom and at their site, so this helps students stay afloat financially while getting valuable, hands-‐on experience. The CTE programs need to continue to have these internships as a graduation requirement and Kulia must continue to provide monetary backing to reach success in this area and in the students’ academic and career paths.


SLO #1: The hiring of an educational specialist will assist in the efforts of student follow-‐up and engagement, thereby hopefully impacting retention. SLO #2: No improvements have been made in this area.


Yes, both SLO’s will remain the same and are part of seven established performance measures of the grant. The assessment and methodology will remain the same.


40

Name(s)

Program Name

Cathy Wehrman Date Apr 28, 2014 Single Parents & Displaced Homemakers (SPDH) Program

Academic Year 2014 -‐ 2015

Names of individuals who contributed to this report: Cathy Wehrman, SPDH Program Coordinator/Counselor & Annie Siu Yep, SPDH Program Specialist

Description

A. Official Name and Description of your Program. (This information will be used in all of our official documents including the KCC catalog.

B. How does your program mission support the Student Services mission?

C. (1) Outcomes. Briefly describe which of the Student Learning Outcomes or Service Area Learning Outcomes are related to your program learning outcomes. (2) Means of Assessment and Criterion for Success. What were the specific assessment tools used? What is the criterion for success? Did you reach it? (3) Analysis of Data Collected Summarize the outcomes, means of assessment and criteria for success. Include the program's process for determining who participated in the assessment and the sample size. What do the data tell us about this process in terms of goals, outcomes, and means of assessment; defined criteria for success; implementation process; and data collection? (Taken from Guidelines for Summary of Assessment and Closing the Loop document)

C. (1) For the academic year 2012-1013 the SPDH program's SLO was "Students will be able to identify their next step(s) as a result of attending a SPDH info session. C. (2) The SPDH program staff conduct bi-monthly information session for prospective, new and continuing students who are interested in our program services. At these sessions, we distribute "Next Step" sheets, whereby students are asked to indicate what is their most urgent need or concern that they want addressed at this session. Following the completion of the info session, students are then asked to indicate their next steps, using the information they have gained at the info session. At the beginning of Fall '12 we were using a half-sheet "Next step", sheet in conjunction with a blank "Personalized Step Sheet", which is on the back of our "Steps to Getting Started at KCC" form which we developed for our SPDH program. We kept the half sheet and wrote detailed next steps on the "Personalized Step Sheet" for the student so they had a "take-away" to refer to. C. (3) We are a small program, and our sample size reflects this. 46 responses are being analyzed for 12-13. Not every new student is given these forms to complete. We often see students who are emotionally distraught, and we address their immediate situation. They are not in the mindset to complete forms. We do try to ask them to do these forms in follow-up sessions if appropriate. However, we need to look at a systematic way to collect data if this form is not introduced in the first session with us. We have noticed a trend in answers for both the immediate need/concern the students indicate prior to beginning the session. We also saw redundancy in the next step(s) responses. We also noticed that for some respondents that the next steps did not often align with their stated need/concern. This is of interest to us, and we can surmise that in the course of our session, many things are brought up which are new topics to the students to address. We are gratified that 100% did say that the session addressed their stated need. Based on previous data collected we wanted 60% of our respondents to be at #3-Competent- Student can clearly identify next step(s) needed for their individual situation. We had at 2 raters grade each of the responses to increase reliability. Data shows that we met the 60% benchmark only for Spring 2013 at 74% of students being rated as Competent. In the Fall 2012 53% were rated as competent and in the Summer of 2013 58% were rated similarly rated. Some factors that may be attributed than lower than expected scores were that we did count partially completed step sheets; for example, they may have stated their concern/need, but neglected to complete their next steps. The students who did not complete this section were those who were distraught, had to leave early, etc. We have observed that these students will make follow-up appointments, and next steps are then addressed.

41

D. Did your program accomplish the goals/recommendations from your last program review? (Address this question beginning with your second program review cycle.)



42

B. Number of Students Served by your program and Staffing Levels 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011 2011 - 2012 2012 - 2013 2013 - 2014 2014 - 2015

No. of Students Served

Staffing Levels



D. Number of Students Served by your program and Budgeting Levels 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011 2011 - 2012 2012 - 2013 2013 - 2014 2014 - 2015

No. of Students Served

Budget Levels


43




44


Next Steps -‐ Planning for next year's 2014 ARPD cycle

A. What are your next steps -‐ acting on the results. What changes if any will you make in your program to improve your achievement data and student learning outcomes? Who will do it and what resources do you need? What improvements have already been made? Will the SLO remain the same for 2012-‐2013? Will the assessment/methodology remain the same?

We realize that there is great variation in how students complete the "Next Steps" form . Having more "standardized" categories to chose from, in addition to having a space for them to fill in their own needs/ concerns that may not be listed will help students to start considering categories they may not realize they should be thinking about when considering college. Also we analyzed the responses that students listed as their next steps, and will include common categories in our new sheet, keeping in mind a "Other" category. We are in the process of developing a more comprehensive plan sheet, which will consolidate the current "Next Steps" form and the "Personalized Step Sheet", which is currently a blank sheet . We plan to keep a copy of the new step sheet in the students' file, and have them bring it with them to future appointments so we can ascertain what steps have been taken, and what still needs follow-up. We requested funds for additional laptops so we can move to doing these assessments on-line. This will help us keep better track of responses and make it easier to update students' progress. We also asked for permanent staffing for the program specialist position to have continuity in personnel to optimize SPDH program operations. For the academic year 2013-14 the counselors worked together to create common SLO's and rubrics. In 2013-14, the SPDH program chose to assess Program Learning Goal #5: Students will appraise, manage, and advocate for themselves to achieve their goals(s). Specifically we are doing SLO 5a.- Student will be able to identify a problem/need and SLO 5b.- Student will be able to identify strategies and develop a plan to solve the problem or need. While similar to the SLO of 2012-13, the rubrics are slightly different. We will be using the new "Step Sheet" to assess these new SLO's.

45

04/15/14 ab

Summary of Assessment and Closing the Loop Template Program Name TRIO Student Support Services Report Date 5/1/2014 Author/s Brandon Chun

SLOs:

SLO #1 Financial literacy is one of the mandatory services the program must provide to all of its students. USA Funds currently offers online financial literacy modules

SLO #2 Completion of FAFSA prior to KCC’s Priority deadline of March 1st .


1) What was the specific assessment tools used?

SLO #1-‐ USA Funds provides weekly excel spreadsheets of TRIO participant progress.

SLO #2 -‐ SARS TRAK ADMIN is the tool used to download student usage reports. TRIO then run the usage reports through banner screen ROARMAN to see if the FAFSA has been completed.

2) What is the criterion

for success? Did you reach it?

• SLO #1 -‐ 15 % of participants will begin using the online financial literacy program.

• SLO #2 -‐ 50% of students who seek FAFSA assistance will complete their FAFSA application prior to the priority deadline.


3) Summarize the outcomes, means of assessment and criteria for success. Include the

SLO #1 -‐ Through a multi-‐step intervention process, students become aware of the many services of the

46

04/15/14 ab

program’s process for determining who participated in the assessment and the sample size.

TRIO program. Starting at the TRIO intake meeting, students are introduced to the services and expectations of the program. Next, students meet one-‐on-‐one with an academic counselor to plan their journey at KCC. The discussion facilitates an open dialogue between counselor and student and is one of the core services of the program. Along with academic advising, students are introduced to the online financial literacy modules provided by USA Funds. Every TRIO participant is encouraged to use the modules by all the TRIO staff members. Outcome: 23% of participants used or have begun using the online financial literacy program.

SLO #2 -‐ Every spring semester, the TRIO program hosts a financial aid workshop for all of its participants. During that workshop, students participate in a hands-‐on demonstration of the FAFSA application. The workshop concludes with the participants filing for their FAFSA. 100% of students who sought FAFSA assistance completed their FAFSA application prior to the priority deadline.


SLO #1 – TRIO has exceeded its goal of having 23% of project participants used or have begun using the online financial literacy program.

SLO #2 -‐ TRIO has exceeded its goal of having 15 % of participants will begin using the online financial literacy program.

Use of Results

5) What do the data indicate about program improvement?

The outcome data indicates that TRIO is competent in its ability to meet and exceed these SLO’s.

47

04/15/14 ab

What, if anything, needs to be done at the program level to improve student learning? What resources are necessary to accomplish this?

6) What

improvements have already been made?

N/A


Since the outcome data indicates that TRIO is competent in meeting its current SLO’s, TRIO will be shifting its assessment to a more robust set of learning outcomes.


48