NARRATIVE: INSTRUCTIONAL CPPR

1 S a n L u i s O b i s p o C o u n t y C o m m u n i t y C o l l e g e D i s t r i c t I n s t i t u t i o n a l P r o g r a m P l a n n i n g a n d R e v i e w D o c u m e n t 2 0 1 4 - 2 0 1 5

INSTRUCTIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM PLANNING AND REVIEW (CPPR)

Only to be completed by those programs scheduled for the year according to the institutional comprehensive planning cycle for instructional programs (i.e., every four years for CTE programs and five years for all other instructional programs), which is produced by the Office of Academic Affairs. Program: Chemistry Planning Year: 2014-2015 Last Year CPPR Completed: 2008-2009 Unit: Physical Sciences Cluster: MBPSNAHKA

NARRATIVE: INSTRUCTIONAL CPPR

Please use the following narrative outline:

I. GENERAL INFORMATION AND PROGRAM OUTCOMES

A. General Description about the Program

Program Mission The mission of the Chemistry Program, which is part of the Physical Sciences division, is to support the Mission of Cuesta College by supporting our students to achieve their academic, transfer, workforce preparation, career advancement, and personal goals. We provide preparation for transfer students majoring in chemistry and related science and engineering fields as well as for occupational students who need chemistry-related knowledge and skills. The department also presents an excellent opportunity for students wishing to enhance their general education and scientific knowledge. The chemistry department is committed to integrating appropriate technology, modern instrumentation, traditional and contemporary pedagogical approaches, and assessment of student learning into classes to create a supportive environment that engages all students in classroom activities.

History of the program

The Chemistry Program has evolved to align closely with the degree requirements of undergraduate universities and provides freshman and sophomore-level Chemistry courses that are transferable for Chemistry and other science and engineering majors. Current course offerings satisfy most transfer requirements and articulation agreements are in place for many of the CSU and UC campuses. The program’s current core course offerings consist of the following:

Chem 201A General College Chemistry Chem 201B General College Chemistry Chem 210 Introductory Chemistry Chem 210FL Introductory Chemistry with Facilitator Assisted Learning Chem 211 Introductory Organic/Biochemistry Chem 212A Organic Chemistry Chem 212B Organic Chemistry

These courses fulfill the General Education requirement in the Physical Sciences, act as prerequisites

for the Nursing Program and Biology classes, and fulfill the transfer curriculum for most science majors. In addition, Chem 201X, and Chem 245A-245C (which support the Facilitator Assisted Learning program), Chem 193 Special Topics, and Chem 247 Independent Studies are also offered.

Significant changes/improvements since the last Program Review Chemistry has added two FT faculty since the last program review (submitted 2009). o List current and/or new faculty, including part-time faculty

A new full time tenure track instructor was hired and began employment with the district at the start of the Fall 2012 semester. A full-time temporary instructor was hired for Spring 2014. Several new part-time faculty complement the existing part-time faculty in supporting the Chemistry program.

A part-time laboratory technician was hired in 2012 in order to assist with evening laboratory sections and to aid in providing a safe laboratory experience. However, the addition of this 25% position is not sufficient to accommodate the ever-increasing demand for chemistry courses.

Full-time faculty: Praveen Babu Greg Baxley Lara Baxley Bret Clark (Chemistry/Physics) Katherine Jimison Alexandra Kahane Nancy Robeck (FT-temp spring 2014)

Part-Time faculty: Vera Aliño Christine Braun Philip daSilva Kerry Friend Robert Ross Feride Schroeder Tetsuo Uyeda Ken Ward Richard Watts

o Describe how the Program Review was conducted and who was involved

All of the full time Chemistry faculty worked in consultation with the classified staff to complete the CPPR. The FT temporary faculty was invited to participate but chose not to do so. The unit plan was developed jointly by FT faculty and staff.

B. Program Outcomes: List the learning outcomes established for your program 1. Determine the chemical or physical properties of substances based on atomic and molecular structures, orbital theory, the type of chemical bonding, shapes of molecules, and spectroscopic data.

2. Evaluate, interpret, and communicate numerical and chemical information, including the appropriate use of computer software.

3. Solve problems involving chemical reactions including quantitative calculations, mechanisms, synthetic routes, and product prediction.

4. Communicate chemical concepts through the use of molecular formulas, structural formulas, reaction mechanisms, and names of inorganic and organic compounds.

5. Safely perform laboratory experiments based on gravimetric, volumetric, and instrumental analysis techniques and effectively utilize the appropriate experimental apparatus and technology.

II. PROGRAM SUPPORT OF INSTITUTIONAL GOALS, INSTITUTIONAL OBJECTIVES, AND/OR INSTITUTIONAL

LEARNING OUTCOMES

A. Identify how your program addresses or helps the district to achieve its Institutional Goals and Objectives, and/or operational planning initiatives. Please refer back to the Planning Documents section of this document. Institutional Goal 1 and Objectives 1.1 and 1.2 focus on increasing the number of students who are transfer-ready and complete degrees. The Chemistry program strongly supports these Institutional objectives. A comprehensive evaluation of disciplinary scheduling has greatly reduced class conflicts and has promoted student access to multiple courses in many disciplines each semester. Success and retention of students in chemistry are at 4-year highs (see data below). The chemistry program has two key initiatives to improve student success. The first is the Facilitator Assisted Learning program for Chem 210FL which provides peer-led study groups and problem solving support for students in Introductory Chemistry. This program has been operating successfully for the last 15 years. The second is Chem 201X Applied Problems for General Chemistry, which is a 1-unit course that supports students taking Chem 201A General Chemistry by providing the opportunity for additional assistance in developing and mastering problem-solving abilities. This course was implemented in 2011.

Chem 201A – General College Chemistry Since the 2009 program review, the number of sections of General Chemistry Chem 201A has increased steadily from 12 sections annually in 2008-2009 to 17 sections in 2013-2014. Demand remains high for this course with fill rates consistently above 100%. Chem 201A is essential for students preparing for transfer to four-year universities to pursue degrees in science and engineering. Chem 201A is also a required course for several Associate Degrees for Transfer, including Geology, Kinesiology, Physics, and the pending Chemistry and Biology degrees. In 2013 the Course Outline of Record for Chem 201A was modified in order to align it with the C-ID course descriptor. Chem 201B – General College Chemistry As demand for Chem 201A has increased, numbers in Chem 201B have increased as well. Offerings in Chem 201B have increased from four to seven sections annually, with fill rates increasing from 88.5% to 103.0%. In 2013 the Course Outline of Record for Chem 201B was modified in order to align it with the C-ID course descriptor. The increase in offerings of Chem 201A and Chem 201B has been possible due to the hiring of one new full time faculty in 2012 and the expected hiring of another in fall of 2014. However, more sections of these courses will not be possible without additional lecture space and laboratory technician support. Chem 201X – Applied Problems for General Chemistry Added to the curriculum in fall 2011, this course supports students in Chem 201A by providing them with extra practicing in solving problems in peer groups and under the direction of a Chem 201A instructor. The division offers one section each semester in fall and spring. Students who take this course report that they find that it helps them with mastering the material from Chem 201A. Chem 210FL/210 – Introductory Chemistry with Facilitator Assisted Learning Offering 8 SLO and 3 NCC sections of Introductory Chemistry with Facilitator Assisted Learning per semester appears to have met student demand for the course, while routinely operating at full capacity. CHEM 210FL is a common prerequisite for many classes & programs. Maintaining eight

sections of Chem 210FL/210 is important as a lack of capacity will result in a bottleneck effect that will preclude students from enrolling in requisite courses and will force students to delay entry into degree/certificate programs. The Facilitator Assisted Learning (FAL) portion of this course is supported by the Chem 245A-C courses which train and organize the facilitators that lead the FAL sessions. Maintaining the FAL portion of the course is necessary not only to be in compliance with the Course Outline of Record, but also to maintain the student retention and success levels currently observed for Chem 210FL. Chem 211 – Introductory Organic/Biochemistry Introductory Organic and Biochemistry offerings at Cuesta College have been reduced from 3 sections during the Spring 2007 semester to 1 section during Fall and 2 sections during Spring semesters to accommodate the need for more general chemistry sections. However, demand for Chem 211 appears to have been met. The course meets the requirements for Dental Hygiene and other Allied Health majors. In addition, Chem 211 meets the needs of students who transfer to four year universities. For example, Chem 211 articulates with Cal Poly San Luis Obispo as Chem 212 and Chem 216/316 in certain instances. It fulfills requirements to obtain undergraduate degrees in wide variety of fields including Animal Science, Biological Sciences, Agriculture, Environmental sciences, and Wine & Viticulture. Demand should remain high for Chem 211 given the numerous program and major requirements it supports and that Chem 211 is a requirement for the Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN) degree.

Chem 212A and 212B – Organic Chemistry One section of both Chem 212A and 212B has consistently been offered in sequential fall and spring semester and fills to capacity. Students are generally premedical, preveterinary, prepharmacy, biology, chemistry, and physics majors. Once a commitment has been made for the Chem 212A during Fall semester, it is essential that the second course in the sequence is offered during Spring semester. The topic order is often not consistent between institutions so it is especially difficult to complete the sequence after transferring. The C-ID descriptor for organic chemistry includes a note strongly recommending that students complete the sequence at a single institution before transferring. Demand should remain high as Chem 212A/B is a part of the Transfer Model Curriculum for chemistry. There may be a need to increase the enrollment by adding a second lab section with a double lecture. This will require substantial funding to set up the lab equipment and supplies but will also generate substantial FTES. The lab component of Chem 212A/B requires significant technician support and instrumentation. There is an immediate need for increased technician support on the SLO campus. We are requesting an increase of 25% effective Fall 2014. This must be increased by 50% further in order to add a second lab section of Chem 212A/B. Structural elucidation using modern instrumental methods is a requirement for this course curriculum in order for it to meet the C-ID descriptor, and to maintain articulation. Upkeep and replacement of instrumentation such as our GCs, IR spectrometer, HPLC is imperative to meet course objectives. The addition of an NMR spectrometer would greatly strengthen the structure elucidation requirement, and reduce additional lab courses required after students transfer. In addition, NMR is becoming standard instrumentation in sophomore organic chemistry labs at four year universities and some community colleges (including local Allan Hancock College). In order to provide Cuesta students with an appropriate lab experience, an NMR will need to be acquired. Chem 245A, 245B, 245C – Chemistry Facilitator Assisted Learning courses These facilitator courses train our student facilitators to lead the FAL sessions attended by the Chem

210FL students. The three tiered-level courses were designed to replace former facilitator courses Chem 243 and 244. Chem 244 was formerly repeatable three times (and 243 was repeatable twice), but state level changes in repeatability necessitated breaking these courses into separate courses that better documented the different objectives and skills expected from second and third time facilitators compared to first time facilitators. As part of the reorganization, objectives from Chem 243 and 244 were combined so that facilitators only need to register for one course each semester instead of two.

B. Identify how your program helps students achieve Institutional Learning Outcomes. Students who complete Chem 210FL, Chem 201A, Chem 201B, Chem 211, Chem 212A, or Chem 212B will meet the following ILOs: ILO 2 Critical Thinking and Communication

Students in all chemistry courses improve their critical thinking skills by analyzing complex chemistry problems in both lecture and laboratory settings. In the laboratory in particular, students are required to develop experimental plans and molecular-level models to relay chemical information. Students improve their communication skills by answering questions in both sentence and chemical symbol formats. In Chem 212, students practice scientific communication by keeping a laboratory notebook and writing lab reports using American Chemistry Society style.

ILO 3 Scientific and Environmental Understanding

All courses in the chemistry program help students improve scientific understanding. The lab component of chemistry courses is essential for the outcome of drawing conclusions based on the scientific method, computations or experimental and observational evidence. All courses have students construct and analyze statements in a formal symbolic system (chemical symbols).

ILO 6 Technical and Information Fluency

Many of the laboratory experiments in Chem 201A/201B General College Chemistry require students to measure data using computer controlled instrumentation. Students also manipulate and graph data using excel. Most homework is completed through an online homework system, Mastering Chemistry.

III. PROGRAM DATA ANALYSIS AND PROGRAM-SPECIFIC MEASUREMENTS

Program data is available on the SLOCCCD Institutional Research and Assessment website.

A. Data Summary – Relevant Comments and Analysis

Include enrollment, retention, success, FTES/FTEF, degree and certificate completion, Scorecard data, and other pertinent information. o Response to specific Scorecard data o Response to site specific data

(1) STUDENT SUCCESS – COURSE COMPLETION

Chemistry

Attempted Successful Attempted Successful Attempted Successful Attempted Successful Attempted Successful

N % N % N % N % N %

Chemistry 1,098 68.3% 1,220 71.0% 1,172 70.2% 1,416 74.4% 1,368 74.4%

Overall College 68,995 69.7% 76,252 71.5% 69,043 71.4% 68,519 71.8% 60,005 73.0%

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

http://www.cuesta.edu/aboutcc/planning/research/Student_Learning_Outcomes.html

http://cuesta.edu/aboutcc/planning/research/

68.3%

71.0%

70.2%

74.4%74.4%

69.7%

71.5% 71.4%71.8% 73.0%

65.0%

66.0%

67.0%

68.0%

69.0%

70.0%

71.0%

72.0%

73.0%

74.0%

75.0%

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Co

urs

e S

ucc

ess

Rat

e

Successful Course Completion

Chemistry Overall College

Please review the data above and provide analysis on the factors affecting your program’s overall historical successful course completion percentage, paying particular attention to recent changes. Please also comment on your program’s data and how it compares to the overall college data.

The success of students in chemistry is at 5-year highs and have risen above the college average. The chemistry program has two key initiatives to improve student success. The first is the Facilitator Assisted Learning program for Chem 210FL which provides peer-led study groups and problem solving support for students. The second is a problem solving skills course (Chem 201X). Access to tutoring remains critical for the success of chemistry students in the future. In addition, the chemistry faculty have no access to group study rooms near our offices and classrooms. Space for group study rooms is a critical need.

(2) STUDENT SUCCESS – COURSE COMPLETION by Modality

This data element is not applicable as all chemistry courses are taught in a face to face format. (3) STUDENT DEMAND AND EFFICIENCY

Chemistry

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Sections 50 56 53 61 59

Fill Rate 86.9% 94.1% 96.0% 97.5% 97.8%

FTES/FTEF 16.28 16.82 17.25 17.01 17.19

Overall College

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Sections 3407 3023 2817 2846 2605

Fill Rate 89.3% 96.4% 91.4% 87.8% 82.8%

FTES/FTEF 15 15.89 15.31 15.08 14.29

16.28 16.82 17.25 17.01 17.19

15 15.89 15.31 15.08 14.29

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

FTES

/FTE

F

FTES/FTEF


86.9%

94.1%96.0%

97.5% 97.8%89.3%

96.4%91.4%

87.8%

82.8%

75.0%

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Co

urs

e F

ill R

ate

s

Fill Rates


Please review the data above and provide analysis on the factors affecting your program’s historical fill rate and FTES/FTEF, paying particular attention to recent changes. Please also comment on your program’s data related to the overall college data.

The FTES/FTEF ratio for chemistry has increased slightly since 2008-2009, and at 17.19 is significantly higher than the college average of 14.29. The FTES/FTEF ratio has decreased in spring 2014 (17.1 fall 2013, 16.3 in spring 2014), but is still higher than the college overall. Fill rates for Chemistry have increased steadily, from 86.9% in 2008-2009 to 97.8% in 2012-2013, and are much higher than the college overall. (4) Program Progress towards Institutional Goals and Objectives (Goal 1): The San Luis Obispo Community College District will enhance its programs and services to promote students’ successful completion of transfer requirements, degrees, certificates, and courses.

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Degrees 6 4 3 2 2

Certificates 0 0 0 0 0

6

4

3

2 2

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Nu

mb

er

of

Pro

gram

Aw

ard

s

Degrees and Certificates Awarded

Degrees Certificates

Please review the data above and provide analysis on the number of degrees and/or certificates awarded, paying particular attention to recent changes.

Although enrollment in chemistry is up from 1013 students in 2008/2009 to 1369 in 2012/2013, the number of degrees awarded in chemistry has declined. The enrollment in the major’s organic chemistry (212A/B) has been near 100% for the same time period. This data points to the lack of control that the chemistry program has over its degree applicant numbers. As Chem 201B, Chem 212A, and Chem 212B students near the completion of Chemistry coursework needed for the AS Chemistry degree, we should encourage them to apply for the degree. Students completing Chem 212B have often completed all of the major requirements for multiple degrees (including AS Chemistry degree) as well as the transfer General Education requirements. However, most have not completed the health and /or diversity requirement. Early encouragement to complete these two Cuesta degree requirements should greatly increase the number of AS degrees conferred.

IV. CURRICULUM REVIEW

A. List all courses that have been created, updated, modified, or eliminated (and approved by the Curriculum Committee) since the last CPPR. Created: Chem 201X – Applied Problems for General Chemistry Chem 245A – Introduction to Chemistry Facilitator Assisted Learning Chem 245B – Advanced Chemistry Facilitator Assisted Learning Chem 245C – Chemistry Facilitator Assisted Learning Mentor Modified:

Chem 201A – General College Chemistry Chem 201B – General College Chemistry Eliminated: Chem 210 – Introductory Chemistry Chem 243 – Facilitator Assisted Learning Chemistry Seminar Chem 244 – Facilitator Assisted Learning Practicum: Chemistry Chem 247 – Independent Studies: Chemistry

B. Provide evidence that the curriculum (including course delivery modalities) has been carefully reviewed during the past five years for currency in teaching practices, compliance with current policies, standards, regulations and advisory committee input. Include evidence that the following entries on the course outline of record (CurricUNET format) are appropriate and complete:

Course description

Student learning outcomes

Pre-requisites/co-requisites

Topics and scope

Course objectives

Alignment of topics and scopes

Textbooks

CSU/IGETC transfer and AA GE information

Degree and Certificate information

Include a calendar of a five-year cycle during which all aspects of the course outline of record and program curriculum, including the list above, will be reviewed for currency, quality, and appropriate CurricUNET format.

See attached curriculum documents.

V. PROGRAM OUTCOMES, ASSESSMENTS AND IMPROVEMENTS

A. Attach Course or Program Assessment Summary (CPAS) form for each course in the program. Faculty may summarize data results rather than providing raw data or exact figures. Attach an assessment cycle calendar for your program. See attached CPAS, Program Assessment Mapping and Calendar, and Course Assessment Calendar. Chem 201A – General College Chemistry Students are assessed using an online assessment quiz that is administered in the last weekend of the semester. In addition, students are surveyed at the end of each semester. Assessment in Chem 201A occurs in every section during fall and spring semesters. Chem 201B – General College Chemistry Students are assessed in every section every semester, fall, spring and summer using the American Chemical Society General Chemistry Exam. Students are also regularly surveyed. Chem 210FL – Introductory Chemistry with Facilitator Assisted Learning Two cycles of assessments have been performed and a third cycle will begin Spring 2014. The outcomes are assessed by administering a uniform quiz to all Chem 210FL students. The quiz contains both chemistry problems designed to test students’ mastering of SLOs, as well as self-assessment questions that allow students to report how well they think they have achieved course SLOs. Chem 211 – Introductory Organic/Biochemistry Assessment occurs through in-class examination questions, quiz questions, and questions following laboratory experiments. Chem 212A/B – Organic Chemistry Assessment occurs through in-class examination questions; laboratory reports and exercises i.e., NMR Spectral Exercises; student survey; and the American Chemical Society Organic Chemistry examination. Formal data collection and analysis began during Spring and Fall 2011 semesters and continues during the 2013-14 academic year.

B. Include a mapping document that indicates how course-level SLOs connect to program-level SLOs. Reference: Student Learning Outcomes and Assessments.

Summarize recent assessment efforts and assessment methods within the program (You may attach recent program-level CPAS in lieu of this narrative). Attached.

C. Highlight improvement efforts that have resulted from SLO assessment.

Briefly summarize program improvements or changes that have been implemented since the last APPW or CPPR. (You may attach recent program-level CPAS in lieu of this narrative). See attached program-level CPAS.

D. Recommend changes and updates to program funding based on assessment of SLOs.

For funding requests complete the applicable Unit Plan Funding Request Worksheet

For faculty hiring needs, attach Section H – Faculty Prioritization Process Identify and describe any budget requests that are related to student learning outcomes assessment results or institutional/programmatic objectives.

http://academic.cuesta.edu/sloa/

See attached Faculty Prioritization documents Worksheet A.1: Subjective Ranking and Worksheet B.1: Objective Criteria.

VI. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT/FORECASTING

Create a short narrative describing the development forecasting elements, indicating how they support efforts to achieve any of the following, where applicable: Program Outcomes, Institutional Goals, Institutional Objectives, and/or Institutional Learning Outcomes.

New or modified action steps for achieving Institutional Goals and Objectives The program will strive to increase retention and success through improved teaching and assessment. The program is highly committed to the goal of providing multiple pathways for students taking our courses, and actively adjusts scheduling to accommodate math, physics, and biology courses.

New or modified action steps for achieving Institutional Learning Outcomes

New or modified action steps for achieving program outcomes Chem 201A: In partial response to the assessment that students struggle with problems solving skills, the course Chemistry 201X was created to provide extra assistance to students with deficiencies in solving problems. Results from a student self-survey show that students do not observe a connection between lab experiments and lecture concepts. A greater emphasis will be made connecting the two parts of the course. Chem 201B: Students report on a self-assessment (Spring 2010) that they perceive their skills in quantitative analysis as weaker than other SLOs. A new prelab assignment and an additional worksheet is in development. Chem 201A and 201B: No further major development is forecasted, unless the So. County facility includes labs, or the temporary labs are relocated. It is possible that 201X offerings will be expanded, depending on student interest and any measurable effectiveness for increasing student success/retention. Chem 210FL No further major development is forecasted. The focus will be on maintaining offerings to ensure that student demand continues to be met. In addition, support for the student facilitator courses Chem 244 and Chem 245 must also be maintained as it is not possible to offer Chem 210FL without student facilitators, and the facilitator program I essential to maintain student success in Introductory Chemistry.

Offering Chemistry 201A/201B and 210FL during summer session is vital for students, as the summer session allows them to complete prerequisites and transfer requirements. Chem 211: The continued demand for Chem 211 will require a minimum of 3 sections to be taught each year. Chem 212A/212B: Demand for the Organic Chemistry sequence remains strong. To maintain a quality curriculum, we need to update instrumentation (FTIR and HPLC) and acquire an NMR instrument. If we are to add a second section, we will need additional lab technician support.

Anticipated changes in curriculum and scheduling

Curriculum was reviewed during 2013-2014 in order to determine compatibility with the C-ID course descriptors, and to identify and update outdated course outlines of record. A full time, temporary faculty member was hired for Spring 2014 semester to address demand and loss of PT faculty. The number of students turned away from the Chem 212 class will be monitored, and it is possible that a 2nd lab section may need to be added if demand remains high. The increased number of Chem 201A/201B sections may require that multiple sections of the same laboratory be scheduled concurrently. If this occurs, a second set of Vernier data acquisition probes ($8,000) will be required. This is included in the unit plan.

Chem 201A and Chem 210FL can be offered in South County if the campus either provides adequate lab facilities and provides the necessary staff, chemicals and equipment. Estimated costs: $200,000 for chemicals and equipment, $13,000 for laptop computers. Offering college-level chemistry labs at a high school facility is not possible due to inherent safety and pedagogical issues. Chem 201B: The course offerings have been expanded to meet the expected demand arising from increased Chem 201A sections. No further expansion of either course is possible without new faculty and lab technician hires or reductions in other course offerings. Chem 212A/B: These courses have filled to capacity for the last 10 years with multiple students turned away during Fall semester. Once a commitment has been made for the Chem 212A during Fall semester, it is essential that the second course in the sequence is offered during Spring semester. The topic order is often not consistent between institutions so it is especially difficult to complete the sequence after transferring. Demand should remain high as it Chem 212A/B is part of the Transfer Model Curriculum for chemistry.

Levels or delivery of support services The chemistry program requests the continued support of tutorial services for science and math students. In Fall 2012, 124 hours of tutoring were provided to chemistry students.

Facilities changes The chemistry program, and Physical Sciences in general, requests access to additional lecture space for classes of 48-56 students so that lab sections can be combined into single lectures to maintain or improve productivity (FTES/FTEF). Assignment or construction of lecture space for 50-60 students for 2 half-days per week would partially alleviate the shortage of lecture space. Providing good scheduling patterns for students is critical for the success of Institutional Objectives 1.1 and 1.2 (increasing the number of students who are transfer-ready and complete degrees). In order to accommodate multiple FT faculty who have been sharing offices, the Physical Sciences conference room in the 2300 building was remodeled during summer 2009. This provided two additional offices, one of which is very small and does not meet ADA standards. There is still a need for adequate FT and PT office space in the 2300 building. Current part-time faculty cubicle offices are inadequate. Several adjunct faculty teach multiple sections. The cubicle offices do not provide security for possessions, privacy to converse with students, or adequate technology to perform instructional tasks. Remodeling these cubicles into offices with computers would eliminate these issues. We request dedicated room space for FAL sessions, faculty review sessions for group work after classes, and meetings for Chemistry and Physics clubs. Our office building has no conference room or

common space for such activities. We envision that one of the deactivated programs must have resulted in a free room or two that our highly productive and expanded program could utilize. Physical Science facilities requests that impact instruction on the North County campus include the installation of (1) a second projector in the main lecture hall of the Fox Building (N2401) to bring it up to the same standard as other Physical Sciences lecture halls, (2) additional periodic tables in N2401 for students seated farther back than just the first few rows, (3) lighting upgrades in N2401 so all periodic tables are clearly visible, and (4) display cases in N2409 for geology samples currently housed in another location to be available to geology instructors while teaching in N2409. We also request a number of safety hazards in the Fox Building (N2400) be addressed. These include repairing plumbing leaks (N2406 &N2409), the installation of additional electrical outlets to reduce the risk of shock or fire (N2406A), the replacement of damaged ceiling tiles that may fall on students (N2406/N2406A), securing equipment improperly anchored to damaged drywall (N2406), repairing broken latches on cabinets used for hazardous waste chemical storage (N2406), and repairing loose or broken sprinklers and escutcheons in the ceiling (N2406). Finally, technician access between N2406 and N2409 should be provided by the installation of a doorway between the two (adjacent) rooms to alleviate the safety hazard created whenever NC technicians must move equipment and chemicals from N2406/N2406A to N2409 by exiting and walking around the exterior of the N2400 building.

Staffing projections The workload for the current SLO campus Chemistry laboratory technician has increased substantially over the past few years. Chemistry enrollment has grown from 50 sections to 59 sections since 2008/2009. An additional 25% time Chemistry laboratory technician was provided in 2012 in order to address serious safety concerns and maintain student enrollments. This is no longer sufficient. We are requesting that this 25% position be increased to 50%. As chemistry enrollment increases significantly on the SLO campus, it has decreased somewhat on the NC campus. We are proposing that the full time Chemistry lab technician position assigned to the NC campus be transferred to SLO and the new 50% position be assigned to NC. This will result in 2 full time chemistry lab technician positions at SLO and a 50% position at NC. This is a safety concern. It is essential that we have adequate support for faculty and students in lab in order to maintain a safe educational environment.

Strategies for responding to the predicted budget and FTES target for the next academic year The chemistry program is attempting to add or maintain the FTES from 2012-2013 in order to add higher productivity courses to the district’s schedule. The Chemistry program has not had a budget augmentation for instructional supplies in at least 10 years. This is despite the fact that Chemistry enrollment on the SLO campus has grown significantly since 2005, and overall costs have increased. Although we have been able to maintain quality programs on our existing instructional supplies budget, it must be augmented in the near future to support the increasing costs associated with the additional sections of each course that are offered. Each new section is accompanied by a new laboratory component that requires costly consumables and additional equipment. Adjustments for inflation and increasing costs of transport/shipping of needed hazardous instructional supplies must be added to the budget. Moreover, maintenance and replacement costs for existing equipment must also be augmented as the heavy influx of students will increase equipment repairs and replacement.

In order to maintain instrumentation and equipment, we may experience a budgetary shortfall. During the spring 2014 semester we experienced the failure of equipment/instruments that cannot be repaired. These are crucial to maintain the lab curriculum necessary for articulation yet result in short term solutions and inadequate emergency repairs. The replacement costs are significant (FTIR $30,000, lab washer $15,000, 2 balances $1600 each). There is no current budget to replace aging instruments and equipment yet new instruments/equipment must be funded immediately. We expect this trend to continue as much of our instrumentation/equipment was purchased in the 1990s.

VII. END NOTES (If Applicable)

If applicable, you may attach additional documents or information, such as assessment forms, awards, letters, samples, lists of students working in the field, etc.

SUPPLEMENTAL DOCUMENTS

FACULTY HIRING PRIORITIZATION INFORMATION (IF APPLICABLE)

If your program requested a faculty position for consideration, please attach or embed the following worksheets that were presented to the College Council:

Worksheet A.1: Subjective Ranking Sheet

Worksheet B.1: Objective Criteria for Teaching Faculty

WORKSHEET A.1 SUBJECTIVE CRITERIA SHEET

(Filled prior to subcommittee prioritization meeting)

POSITION: ___Chemistry 1_______ Please write one or two sentences to address each prompt. Use 10-point, Arial font

1. Are you requesting a new position or a replacement position?

Growth in Chemistry classes and recent loss of several long-time adjunct instructors has created a critical need for a full time Chemistry Instructor in order to meet the needs of students. This is a new position.

2. Are there any safety concerns if this position is not filled?

Chemistry labs can be a hazardous environment for students. Full time instructors monitor safe student practices, provide training for students and PT staff, oversee safe operation of equipment and direct safe disposal of hazardous lab waste. It is critical for the safety of students that we have full time instructors with the background and experience to maintain a safe learning environment.

3. Does this position provide leadership for classified staff within the discipline? If so, how? This position involves daily leadership of three chemistry laboratory technicians. Multiple duties are coordinated by the full-time faculty member including hiring/training/mentoring technicians, directing technicians in perform tasks vital to student success, and monitoring safe laboratory procedures.

4. What service to the campus community does this position provide? Chemistry classes directly support multiple majors and are prerequisites for numerous courses. Enrollment in the chemistry courses has been increasing to meet the needs of students in nursing/allied health, biology, kinesiology, agriculture, general ed, as well as science majors. A deficiency in chemistry offerings will impact these multiple programs.

5. Does this position maintain any equipment and/or materials? Explain. The routine duties of a FT Chemistry instructor involve the daily use of equipment, materials, and instruments. In collaboration with the lab technician, FT instructors make informed decisions about purchase, maintenance, and repair of sensitive and expensive instruments and equipment .

6. How would this new position assist in the fulfillment of divisional responsibilities for full-time faculty?

Most of the full time faculty in the division teach significant overload (up to 56%) every semester and often in multiple locations. This teaching load is in addition to substantial Division workload due to robust programs at both the SLO and NC facilities. This teaching overload affects the instructors’ ability to actively participate in Divisional responsibilities. We currently have 5 FT faculty to teach 26 CRNs of lecture/lab, to serve on technician, adjunct, and FT temp hiring committees, to mentor adjunct faculty, to develop/update curriculum, to assess SLOs, and to monitor safety in labs.

7. Have you had any difficulty in hiring part-time instructors in your discipline? Please include data from Human Resources indicating the number of recent part-time hiring cycles and the number of part-time instructors added to the pool.

Traditionally, our part time instructors stay for a semester or two then move on to a full-time position. We have a constant revolving door of inexperienced, short-term adjunct faculty. Unfortunately, we seldom are able to choose from a “pool” but merely hire anyone who has the minimum quals regardless of experience. We are often forced to decide whether to offer a class with a marginally qualified adjunct instructor or to cancel full classes. These factors are detrimental to the quality of our programs, result in serious concerns regarding safety in labs, and will have long term effects on enrollment outside of the Physical Sciences division. There are currently a total of 8 adjunct faculty and a FT temp in Chemistry for Spring 2014. Three of these are retirees and are unable/unwilling to teach additional classes. Three are unwilling to take additional classes due to FT job/family issues. Another has an “N” on latest evaluations. One long time faculty was recently deceased and another will be leaving after Spring 2014. We have an ongoing search for adjunct faculty as applications for the Chemistry PT pool are “open until filled”. Most recent results of recruitment: Spring 2013: No applicants. There were no new hires as a result of recruitment Summer 2013: A FT temp search was conducted and the position offered. The candidate declined. As a result classes were cancelled and existing faculty were overloaded in order to offer Fall 2013 classes. Fall 2013: Four applicants resulted in one placed in the part time pool and another awaiting equivalency. The candidate placed in the pool has limited availability due to PT work at two other institutions.

8. How does this position support the Mission, Vision, and Values of Cuesta College (please attach planning documentation [e.g., from program review, and/or APPW, and/or Unit Plan, and/or College Plan], new program documentation, Strategic Plan, and growth potential information)

College Mission:“We effectively support students in their efforts to improve foundational skills, transfer to four-year institutions, earn certificates or associate degrees…” Vision: “Cuesta College is dedicated to accessible, high-quality education for the support and enhancement of student success…”

The chemistry program and course offerings clearly meet the criteria stated in the Cuesta College Mission and Vision statements. This full-time position will promote the College’s Mission and Vision.

9. Has your division included the need for this position in Program Plan and Review documentation?

Yes. The 2011-2012 Chemistry APPW states that “the current offerings in Chem 201A/201B are now limited by the availability of PT and FT faculty. Course offerings will not likely be increased to meet the ever-growing student demand unless additional faculty and support staff can be hired.” The 2012-2013 Chemistry APPW states that “the chemistry enrollment is not projected to grow any further without an increase in the number of faculty.”

10. What are the critical effects on the overall program if the position is not filled? Chemistry is a highly specialized field which requires expertise in hands-on lab procedures, equipment operation and maintenance, and the safe use and disposal of hazardous materials. In addition to division responsibilities, our current full time faculty have been teaching significant overloads for multiple semesters. In some cases, faculty teach multiple subject areas, in split locations, and with up to 5 preps. This is unsustainable. Full-time faculty would prefer to teach a reasonable 100-110% load on a regular basis. In the event that this position is not hired, we will not be able to meet the needs of current or future students.

11. What will be the impact on other College programs if this position is not filled? See #4. Chemistry classes directly support multiple majors and are prerequisites for numerous courses. Enrollment in the chemistry courses has been increasing to meet the needs of students in nursing/allied health, biology, kinesiology, agriculture, general education, as well as science majors. A deficiency in chemistry offerings will impact these multiple programs. Fewer students will be able to take courses for which chemistry is a prerequisite. This will directly impact other college programs and decrease the number of students who are transfer-ready.

12. What will the district-wide impact be if this position is not filled? Without additional FT faculty, we will be unable to continue meet current student demand for chemistry classes. Yet, with the implementation of the ADT and inclusion of chemistry courses in the C-ID, we anticipate the need to serve an even greater number of transfer students. This will also create further opportunity to generate FTES. The FT temp position for Spring 2014 allowed us to 4 CRNs in chemistry with an increase in approximately 22 FTES. This permanent FT position, will allow us to maintain these 4 additional sections of chemistry for the 2014-15 academic year.

13. What, if any, regulatory requirements or best practice recommendations are involved with this

position? In an effort to meet student demand with diminishing faculty and resources, our Chemistry labs are limited to 24-28 students. There are typically 8-10 sections of Chem 210 per semester at 28 students each. The American Chemical Society recommendations for academic institutions state that Chemistry labs should be limited to no more than 25 students per section.

WORKSHEET A.1

SUBJECTIVE CRITERIA SHEET (Filled prior to subcommittee prioritization meeting)

POSITION: ___Chemistry 2_______ Please write one or two sentences to address each prompt. Use 10-point, Arial font

1. Are you requesting a new position or a replacement position?

Growth in Chemistry classes and recent loss of several long-time adjunct instructors has created a critical need for a full time Chemistry Instructor in order to meet the needs of students. This is a new position.

2. Are there any safety concerns if this position is not filled?

Chemistry labs can be a hazardous environment for students. Full time instructors monitor safe student practices, provide training for students and PT staff, oversee safe operation of equipment and direct safe disposal of hazardous lab waste. It is critical for the safety of students that we have full time instructors with the background and experience to maintain a safe learning environment.

3. Does this position provide leadership for classified staff within the discipline? If so, how? This position involves daily leadership of three chemistry laboratory technicians. Multiple duties are coordinated by the full-time faculty member including hiring/training/mentoring technicians, directing technicians in perform tasks vital to student success, and monitoring safe laboratory procedures.

4. What service to the campus community does this position provide? Chemistry classes directly support multiple majors and are prerequisites for numerous courses. Enrollment in the chemistry courses has been increasing to meet the needs of students in nursing/allied health, biology, kinesiology, agriculture, general ed, as well as science majors. A deficiency in chemistry offerings will impact these multiple programs.

5. Does this position maintain any equipment and/or materials? Explain. The routine duties of a FT Chemistry instructor involve the daily use of equipment, materials, and instruments. In collaboration with the lab technician, FT instructors make informed decisions about purchase, maintenance, and repair of sensitive and expensive instruments and equipment .

6. How would this new position assist in the fulfillment of divisional responsibilities for full-time faculty?

Most of the full time faculty in the division teach significant overload (up to 56%) every semester and often in multiple locations. This teaching load is in addition to substantial Division workload due to robust programs at both the SLO and NC facilities. This teaching overload affects the instructors’ ability to actively participate in Divisional responsibilities. We currently have 5 FT faculty to teach 26 CRNs of lecture/lab, to serve on technician, adjunct, and FT temp hiring committees, to mentor adjunct faculty, to develop/update curriculum, to assess SLOs, and to monitor safety in labs.

7. Have you had any difficulty in hiring part-time instructors in your discipline? Please include data

from Human Resources indicating the number of recent part-time hiring cycles and the number of part-time instructors added to the pool.

Traditionally, our part time instructors stay for a semester or two then move on to a full-time position. We have a constant revolving door of inexperienced, short-term adjunct faculty. Unfortunately, we seldom are able to choose from a “pool” but merely hire anyone who has the minimum quals regardless of experience. We are often forced to decide whether to offer a class with a marginally qualified adjunct instructor or to cancel full classes. These factors are detrimental to the quality of our programs, result in serious concerns regarding safety in labs, and will have long term effects on enrollment outside of the Physical Sciences division. There are a total of 8 adjunct faculty and a FT temp in Chemistry for Spring 2014. Three of these are retirees and are unable/unwilling to teach additional classes. Three are unwilling to take additional classes due to FT job/family issues. Another has an “N” on latest evaluations. One long time faculty was recently deceased and another will be leaving after Spring 2014. We have an ongoing search for adjunct faculty as applications for the Chemistry PT pool are “open until filled”. Most recent results of recruitment: Spring 2013: No applicants. There were no new hires as a result of recruitment Summer 2013: A FT temp search was conducted and the position offered. The candidate declined. As a result classes were cancelled and existing faculty were overloaded in order to offer Fall 2013 classes. Fall 2013: Four applicants resulted in one placed in the part time pool and another awaiting equivalency. The candidate placed in the pool has limited availability due to PT work at two other institutions.

8. How does this position support the Mission, Vision, and Values of Cuesta College (please attach planning documentation [e.g., from program review, and/or APPW, and/or Unit Plan, and/or College Plan], new program documentation, Strategic Plan, and growth potential information)

College Mission:“We effectively support students in their efforts to improve foundational skills, transfer to four-year institutions, earn certificates or associate

degrees…” Vision: “Cuesta College is dedicated to accessible, high-quality education for the support and

enhancement of student success…”

The chemistry program and course offerings clearly meet the criteria stated in the Cuesta College Mission and Vision statements. This full-time position will promote the College’s Mission and Vision.

9. Has your division included the need for this position in Program Plan and Review documentation?

Yes. The 2011-2012 Chemistry APPW states that “the current offerings in Chem 201A/201B are now limited by the availability of PT and FT faculty. Course offerings will not likely be increased to meet the ever-growing student demand unless additional faculty and support staff can be hired.” The 2012-2013 Chemistry APPW states that “the chemistry enrollment is not projected to grow any further without an increase in the number of faculty.”

10. What are the critical effects on the overall program if the position is not filled? Chemistry is a highly specialized field which requires expertise in hands-on lab procedures, equipment operation and maintenance, and the safe use and disposal of hazardous materials.

In addition to division responsibilities, our current full time faculty have been teaching significant overloads for multiple semesters. In some cases, faculty teach multiple subject areas, in split locations, and with up to 5 preps. This is unsustainable. Full-time faculty would prefer to teach a reasonable 100-110% load on a regular basis. In the event that this position is not hired, we will not be able to meet the needs of current or future students.

11. What will be the impact on other College programs if this position is not filled? See #4. Chemistry classes directly support multiple majors and are prerequisites for numerous courses. Enrollment in the chemistry courses has been increasing to meet the needs of students in nursing/allied health, biology, kinesiology, agriculture, general education, as well as science majors. A deficiency in chemistry offerings will impact these multiple programs. Fewer students will be able to take courses for which chemistry is a prerequisite. This will directly impact other college programs and decrease the number of students who are transfer-ready.

12. What will the district-wide impact be if this position is not filled? Without additional FT faculty, we will be unable to continue meet current student demand for chemistry classes. Yet, with the implementation of the ADT and inclusion of chemistry courses in the C-ID, we anticipate the need to serve an even greater number of transfer students. This will also create further opportunity to generate FTES. The FT temp position for Spring 2014 allowed us to 4 CRNs in chemistry with an increase in approximately 22 FTES. This permanent FT position, will allow us to maintain these 4 additional sections of chemistry for the 2014-15 academic year. There is a possibility that two full-time instructors may work a reduced load and/or administrative position beginning Fall 2014. It will be crucial that the college hire full-time instructors to take over this teaching load as we will be unable to fill the gap with part-time instructors.

13. What, if any, regulatory requirements or best practice recommendations are involved with this

position? In an effort to meet student demand with diminishing faculty and resources, our Chemistry labs are limited to 24-28 students. There are typically 8-10 sections of Chem 210 per semester at 28 students each. The American Chemical Society recommendations for academic institutions state that Chemistry labs should be limited to no more than 25 students per section.


Worksheet B.1 OBJECTIVE CRITERIA

Position: Chemistry 1. Data provided by Institutional Research; some data may be the same:

% DATA SEMESTER

Fall 2010 Spring 2011



20% 1 Projected PT/FT load ratio by discipline (if position were hired)

Chem 1: 0.666671585 Chem 2: 0.57277

10% 2

# PT Faculty (duplicated headcount for previous Fall and Spring) / # FT Faculty (duplicated headcount for next Fall and Spring if hired)

Chem 1: 1.333333 Chem 2: 1.142857

10% 3 Number of class sections by division 63 66 67 66 60 60

10% 4 Total Number of Students by discipline 563 610 672 648 640 632

15% 5 Fill rates by discipline 95.7 96.2 98.0 97.9 101.6 94.9

20% 6 FTES/FTEF by discipline 17.39 17.12 17.54 17.30 18.72 16.46

15% 7 FTES by discipline 126.10 133.29 144.42 135.82 139.76 135.28


CURRICULUM REVIEW GUIDE and WORKSHEET Courses and Programs in Chemistry

Current Review Date: 28 February, 2014 Reviewer: Alexandra Kahane

1. Courses List all courses, which were active in your program at the time of the last CPPR.

Review the current CurricUNET Course Outline of Record (COR) for each course and indicate yes/no for each column below.

For each new, modified, and deactivated course provide the effective term posted on CurricUNET.

Course (Prefix / Number)

Currently active

New course since last CPPR

Major modification

since last CPPR

Minor modification

since last CPPR

Deactivated since last CPPR

Notified impacted program(s)*

CHEM 201A yes / no no /

yes: date

no /

yes: F 2014

no /

yes: S 2013 no /

yes: date

CHEM 201B yes / no no /

yes: date

no /

yes: F 2014

no /

yes: S 2013 no /

yes: date

CHEM 201X yes / no no /

yes: F 2011 no /

yes: date

no /

yes: date

no /

yes: date

CHEM 210 yes / no no /

yes: date

no /

yes: date

no /

yes: date

no /

yes: F 2012

CHEM 210FL yes / no no /

yes: date

no /

yes: date

no /

yes: S 2013 no /

yes: date


yes: date

no /

yes: date

no /

yes: S 2013 no /

yes: date


yes: date

no /

yes: date

no /

yes: S 2013 no /

yes: date


yes: date

no /

yes: date

no /

yes: S 2013 no /

yes: date


yes: date

no /

yes: date

no /

yes: S 2013

no /

yes: F 2014


yes: date

no /

yes: date

no /

yes: S 2013

no /

yes: F 2014


yes: S 2014 no /

yes: date

no /

yes: date

no /

yes: date


yes: S 2014 no /

yes: date

no /

yes: date

no /

yes: date

CHEM 245C yes / no no /

yes: F 2014 no /

yes: date

no /

yes: date

no /

yes: date


yes: date

no /

yes: date

no /

yes: date

no /

yes: F 2012

*Note: Please state if the deactivated course impacted any other program(s) and if and when the affected program(s) was/were notified:

Deactivated Course Impacted Program (s) Date affected program was notified CHEM 210 none- CHEM 210FL is used instead N/A

CHEM 243, 244, 247 none N/A

2. Course Review Please review the current CurricUNET CORs for all active courses in your program for currency and

accuracy and annotate the items below.

If you find any mistakes in the CORs (e.g. non-content related items such as typos), contact the Curriculum Chair or Curriculum Specialist for correction.

All other changes require either a minor or major modification. Your curriculum representative will assist you.

Some modifications need to be processed in the current term (see annotations # 2 and #3 below).

Some modifications can be done over the period of the next five years (see annotation #1 below).

Indicate on the Five-Year Cycle Calendar below when a minor or major modification will be submitted.

Course Number CHEM 201A CHEM 201B CHEM 201X CHEM 210FL

1. Effective term listed on COR Date: F 2014 Date: F 2014 Date: F 2011 Date: S 2010

2. Catalog / schedule description is appropriate

yes / no1

yes / no1

yes / no1

yes / no1

3. Pre-/ co-requisites / advisories (if applicable) are appropriate

yes / no2 yes / no

2 yes / no

2 yes / no

2

4. “Approved as Distance Education” is accurate

yes / no4 yes / no

4 yes / no

4 yes / no

4

5. Grading Method is accurate yes / no1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1

6. Repeatability is zero yes / no4 yes / no

4 yes / no

4 yes / no

4

7. Class Size is accurate yes / no2 yes / no

2 yes / no2 yes / no

2 8. Objectives are aligned with

methods of evaluation yes / no

1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1

9. Topics / scope are aligned with objectives

yes / no1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1

10. Assignments are aligned with objectives

yes / no1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1

11. Methods of evaluation are appropriate

yes / no1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1

12. Texts, readings, materials are dated within last 5 years

yes / no3 yes / no

3 yes / no

3 yes / no

3

13. CSU / IGETC transfer & AA GE information (if applicable) is correct

yes / no4 yes / no

4 yes / no

4 yes / no

4

14. Degree / Certificate information (if applicable) is correct

yes / no4 yes / no

4 yes / no

4 yes / no

4

15. Library materials are adequate and current *

yes / no1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1

1 If no, a major modification is needed within the next 5 years (see five-year cycle calendar).

2 If no, a major modification is needed in the current term. (For increase in class size, see your curriculum representative for details.)

3 If no, a minor modification is needed in the current term.

4 If no, contact the Curriculum Chair or Curriculum Specialist.

*Note: Item #15 is not displayed in CurricUNET and must be reviewed separately.

Course Number CHEM 211 CHEM 212A CHEM 212B CHEM 245A

16. Effective term listed on COR Date: S 2013 Date: S 2010 Date: S 2010 Date: S 2014


yes / no1

yes / no1

yes / no1

yes / no1


yes / no2 yes / no

2 yes / no

2 yes / no

2


yes / no4 yes / no

4 yes / no

4 yes / no

4


1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1


4 yes / no

4 yes / no

4


2 yes / no2 yes / no



1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1


yes / no1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1


yes / no1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1


yes / no1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1


yes / no3 yes / no

3 yes / no

3 yes / no

3


yes / no4 yes / no

4 yes / no

4 yes / no

4


yes / no4 yes / no

4 yes / no

4 yes / no

4


yes / no1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1 yes / no

1






Course Number CHEM 245B CHEM 245C

31. Effective term listed on COR Date: F 2014 Date: F 2014


yes / no1

yes / no1


yes / no2 yes / no

2


yes / no4 yes / no

4


1


4




1 yes / no

1


yes / no1 yes / no

1


yes / no1 yes / no

1


yes / no1 yes / no

1


yes / no3 yes / no

3


yes / no4 yes / no

4


yes / no4 yes / no

4


yes / no1 yes / no

1






3. Programs

List all programs/certificates that were active at the time of the last CPPR.

Review the CurricUNET “Program of Study” outline and indicate yes/no for each program/certificate.

For each deactivated program provide the effective term posted on CurricUNET.

Program / Certificate

Title

Currently active

New program since last

CPPR

Program modification

since last CPPR

Deactivated since last

CPPR

Chemistry, AS yes / no no /

yes: date

no /

yes: 2012 no /

yes: date

yes / no no / yes: date

no / yes: date

no / yes: date


no / yes: date

no / yes: date


no / yes: date

no / yes: date


no / yes: date

no / yes: date


no / yes: date

no / yes: date

4. Program Review Review the CurricUNET “Program of Study” outline for each active program/certificate and indicate

yes/no for each column below.

Currently active Program / Certificate:

Title

Required courses and electives, incl. course numbers, course titles, and course

credits, are accurate

Program description is

current

Program Learning

Outcomes are accurate and include method of assessment

Chemistry, AS yes / no* yes / no* yes / no**

yes / no* yes / no* yes / no**





* If not, program modification is needed. ** If not, Program Learning Outcomes modification is needed.

5. Five-Year Cycle Calendar

During the following five-year cycle all aspects of the course outline of record and program curriculum will be reviewed for currency, quality, and appropriate CurricUNET format.

Indicate if a course needs a major or minor modification based on the current course review. Your curriculum representative will assist you.

When submitting a major or minor modification, please enter or update the Student Learning Outcomes for each course.

COURSES

Course Number

Fall 2012

Spring 2013

Fall 2013

Spring 2014

Fall 2014

Spring 2015

Fall 2015

Spring 2016

Fall 2016

Spring 2017

CHEM 201X major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major /

minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major /

minor CHEM 210FL major /

minor major / minor

major /

minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major /

minor CHEM 211 major /

minor major / minor

major /

minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major /

minor CHEM 212A major /

minor major / minor

major / minor

major /

minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major /

minor CHEM 212B major /

minor major / minor

major / minor

major /

minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major /


minor major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major /


minor major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major /


minor major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major /


minor major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major /

minor CHEM 245C major /

minor major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major /

minor major /

minor major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

major / minor

PROGRAMS / CERTIFICATES

Program/Certificate Title

Fall 2012

Spring 2013

Fall 2013

Spring 2014

Fall 2014

Spring 2015

Fall 2015

Spring 2016

Fall 2016

Spring 2017

Chemistry AS modify

modify modify modify modify modify modify modify Review

modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify modify

cmpc 01/27/2013

Program Assessment Mapping and Calendar

Last updated: February 28, 2014 Chem 201B GB Course SLOs & course/program mapping (Chem 212A, 212B) KJ;

March 1, 2011 Program outcomes (formatting only) GB Dec 9, 2010 GB (calendar)

Title of Program: CHEMISTRY Program Level SLOs

1. Analyze the chemical and physical properties of a chemical substance based on the atomic and molecular structure, including orbital theory, the type of chemical bond, and the shape of the molecule.

2. Evaluate and interpret numerical and chemical scientific information. 3. Solve typical stoichiometry problems, including mass/mass, mass/volume, and volume/volume

relationships. 4. Communicate chemical concepts through the use of molecular formulas, structural formulas, and

names of inorganic and organic compounds. 5. Perform laboratory experiments based on gravimetric, volumetric, qualitative and instrumental analysis

techniques, and effectively utilize the appropriate experimental apparatus. Course Level SLOs

Chem 201A

Describe the chemical and physical properties of a chemical substance based on the atomic and molecular structure including orbital theory, the type of chemical bond, and the shape of the molecule.

Evaluate and interpret numerical and chemical scientific information.

Solve stoichiometry problems, including mass/mass, mass/volume, and volume/volume relationships.

Communicate chemical concepts through the use of molecular formulas, structural formulas, and names of compounds.

Perform laboratory experiments based on gravimetric, volumetric, qualitative and instrumental analysis techniques, and effectively utilize the appropriate experimental apparatus.

Chem 201B

Describe the chemical and physical properties of a chemical substance based on the atomic and molecular structure including orbital theory, the type of chemical bond, and the shape of the molecule.

Evaluate and interpret numerical and chemical scientific information.

Solve stoichiometry problems, including mass/mass, mass/volume, and volume/volume relationships.

Communicate chemical concepts through the use of molecular formulas, structural formulas, and names of compounds.

Perform laboratory experiments based on gravimetric, volumetric, qualitative and instrumental analysis techniques, and effectively utilize the appropriate experimental apparatus.

Chem 210/210FL 1. Understand and use chemical laws to:

a. Solve chemical problems using mathematics and dimensional analysis and, b. Explain the observed chemical and physical behavior of matter

2. Understand the information given on the Periodic Table of Elements and apply it to: a. Describe atomic structure b. Predict the chemical properties of individual elements and c. Predict the reactivity of various elements


3. atomic symbols, molecular formulas, chemical equations, nomenclature, structural formulas, and the concept of the mole.

4. Safely perform chemical laboratory experiments to obtain data and visualize chemical concepts using specialized

chemical laboratory equipment.

Chem 211

Explain the theory and concepts of carbon-based chemistry and how these are affected by chemical structure (e.g., molecular shapes, bonding, and chirality/stereoisomerism).

Communicate the language of organic chemistry using International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) nomenclature and representations of molecules specific to organic chemistry (e.g., line angle formulas, Fischer projections, Haworth projections, etc.)

Apply acquired knowledge about chemical functional groups to predict the physical and chemical properties of organic and biochemical molecules.

Describe the composition and function(s) of biochemical pathways.

Safely perform chemical laboratory experiments to demonstrate chemical concepts, synthesize various functional groups, and analyze chemical samples using specialized chemical laboratory equipment.

Chem 212A 1. Predict the chemistry and physical properties of a substance based on molecular structure and

molecular theory. 2. Evaluate and interpret numerical chemical data. 3. Predict products and write mechanisms of Electrophilic addition, Nucleophilic substitution, and

elimination reactions. 4. Write molecule names and structures using IUPAC Nomenclature. 5. Draw conformations and stereoisomers of hydrocarbons. 6. Safely perform organic chemistry lab experiments utilizing appropriate apparatus and glassware. 7. Safely separate and analyze the products of an organic chemistry lab experiment using appropriate

qualitative and instrumental techniques including melting point, thin layer, column, and gas chromatography.

Chem 212B 1. Predict the products and write the mechanisms of electrophilic aromatic substitution, nucleophilic acyl

substitution and addition/elimination reactions. 2. Write multi-step synthesis using retrosynthetic analysis. 3. Identify functional groups using IR spectroscopy. 4. Deduce molecular structure using IR spectroscopy, mass spectrometry, and NMR spectrometry. 5. Describe and draw the structure of addition polymers, monosaccharides, disaccharides,

polysaccharides, amino acids, and proteins. 6. Safely perform organic chemistry lab experiments utilizing appropriate apparatus and glassware. 7. Safely analyze the product of an organic chemistry lab experiment using appropriate qualitative

analysis techniques including melting point, chromatography, and spectroscopy.


Chem 243

Review Chem 210FL topics to reestablish proficiency

Establish groups to maximize discussion time

Maintain gradebook and weekly records of student participation

Chem 244

Develop skills in facilitating discussion sections in small groups

Demonstrate proficiency in the assessment of student participation in small groups Chem 245A

1. Describe basic cooperative learning, peer tutoring, and listening skills.

2. Practice responsibilities associated with assisting students and managing college property

3. Assist Introductory Chemistry students in Chemistry problem-solving techniques.

4. Discuss and model study habits and time management skills applicable to science classes.

5. Clarify course content in order to assist introductory Chemistry students.

Chem 245B

1. Analyze cooperative learning, peer tutoring and listening techniques


3. Assist Introductory Chemistry students in Chemistry problem-solving techniques at an

advanced level

4. Suggest and discuss study habits and time management skills applicable to science classes

5. Clarify course content in order to assist introductory Chemistry students

Chem 245C

1. Demonstrate the characteristics and actions necessary for being an effective mentor.

2. Assess the effectiveness of cooperative learning, peer tutoring and listening techniques in

order to improve facilitator performance.


4. Assist Introductory Chemistry students in Chemistry problem-solving techniques at an

advanced level

5. Suggest and discuss study habits and time management skills applicable to science classes

6. Clarify course content in order to assist introductory Chemistry students

Relationship between assessed Course Level SLOs and Program Level SLOs. Chem 201A:

Course SLO Program Student Learning Outcomes

1 2 3 4 5

1 C

2 C

3 C

4 C

5 C

Key: A (SLOs exist for course) B (SLOs are assessed in course) C (Course assessment report completed) Chem 201B:


1 2 3 4 5

1 C

2 C

3 C

4 C

5 C

Key: A (SLOs exist for course) B (SLOs are assessed in course) C (Course assessment report completed)


Chem 212A:


1 2 3 4 5

1 C

2 C

3 C

4 C

5 C

6 C

7 C

Key: A (SLOs exist for course) B (SLOs are assessed in course) C (Course assessment report completed) Chem 212B:


1 2 3 4 5

1 A

2 A,B,C

3 A,B,C

4 A,B,C

5 A,B,C

6 A,B,C

7 A,B,C

Key: A (SLOs exist for course) B (SLOs are assessed in course) C (Course assessment report completed)


Program Assessment Calendar

CYCLE STAGE

Spring 2013 Fall 2013 Sp 2014 Fall 2014 Sp 2015 Fall 2015

SLO Assessment x x x x x x

Analyze Results & Plan Improvements

x x

Plan Implementation

x

Course Assessment Calendar

CYCLE STAGE

Spring 2013

Fall 2013 Sp 2014 Fall 2014 Sp 2015 Fall 2015 Sp 2016

SLO Assessment

201A 201B Chem 212B

201A 201B

211 PB Chem 212A

245A 245B

201A 201B

210 FAL 211 KJ Chem 212B 245C

201A 201B

211 PB Chem 212A

201A 201B

211 KJ Chem 212B

201A 201B

210 FAL 211 PB

Chem 212A

201A 201B Chem 212B

Analyze Results & Plan

Improvements

210 FAL 211 PB

201A 201B

210 FAL Chem 212B

211 PB

Chem 212A

245A 245B

201A 201B

210 FAL 211 KJ Chem 212B 245C

211 PB Chem 212A

201A 201B

211 KJ Chem 212B

210 FAL 211 PB

Plan Implementation

201A 201B

211 PB Chem 212A

210 FAL Chem 212B

201A 201B

211 PB Chem 212A

210 FAL 201B

211 KJ Chem 212B

201A 201B

211 PB Chem 212A

211 KJ Chem 212B


Course or Program Assessment Summary http://academic.cuesta.edu/sloa/docs/Course_and_Program_Assessment_Summary_F_2011.docx This form can be used to record SLO assessment plans and results for courses or programs. It is recommended that this document be stored on a group drive, or in MyCuesta.

Division: Physical Sciences Program: Chemistry Date: 5/2/2012 v. 3 2012

Courses in program, or course: __Chem 244________________

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Bret Clark Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes_X___ No______

1 Student Learning Outcome Statements

□ Program

x Course

1. Develop skills in facilitating discussion sections in small groups 2. Demonstrate proficiency in the assessment of student participation in small groups

2 Assessment Methods Plan (identify assessment instruments, scoring rubrics, SLO mapping diagrams)

Students will be assessed via Facilitator Feedback forms completed by the students in their section. This form rates the effectiveness of the student facilitators using a five point scale. Students are also assessed via “Letter to my Facilitator” forms also completed by the students in their section.

3 Assessment Administration Plan (date(s), sample size or selection of course sections, scoring procedures, etc.)

1. Facilitator Feedback forms are administered by the ninth week of instruction. They are administered in all sections (which vary in size from three to eighteen students). All facilitators are assessed. The number of facilitators typically ranges from eighteen to twenty-four.

2. “Letter to my Facilitator” forms are administered by the sixteenth week of instruction. The content of these forms is analyzed by the instructors.

4 Assessment Results Summary (summarize Data)

Facilitator Feedback Form Analysis: Assessment results for 29 students on both campuses. Outcome 1: Respondents ranked facilitator skills at 4.1 on a 5-point scale. This corresponds to a ranking

between “meets expectations” (4 points), and “exceeds expectations” (5 points). Outcome 2: 86.2% of the facilitators demonstrated student participation proficiency.

5 Discussion of Assessment Procedure and Results, and Effectiveness of Previous Improvement Plans

Overall, students are thriving in the course. Student facilitators and their students benefit from increased time spent problem solving. One area of criticism is in the facilitator preparation prior to their weekly meeting times. Facilitators need to be more aware of the assignment and topics for the week.

6 Recommended Changes & Plans for Implementation of Improvements

Beginning Fall 2012, a short description of the course assignment will be posted each week on the course website.

http://academic.cuesta.edu/sloa/docs/Course_and_Program_Assessment_Summary_F_2011.docx

7 Description or evidence of dialog among course or program-level faculty about assessment plan and results

Discussions occurred during the Spring 2012 semester between both instructors who teach the course. They will continue to collaborate together and obtain feedback from instructors on the effectiveness of the course.

**Course and program level outcomes are required by ACCJC to be aligned. Each program needs to complete a program map to show the alignment. See examples of completed CPAS and program mapping documents are available at http://academic.cuesta.edu/sloa

http://academic.cuesta.edu/sloa


Division: Physical Sciences Program: Chemistry Date: September 2013 v. 4 2013

Courses in program, or course: __Course: Chem 201A________________________________________________________________

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Praveen Babu, Bret Clark, Greg Baxley, Alex Kahane, Lara Baxley Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes__X___ No______


□ Program

●Course

1. Describe the chemical and physical properties of a chemical substance based on the atomic and molecular structure including orbital theory, the type of chemical bond, and the shape of the molecule.

2. Evaluate and interpret numerical and chemical scientific information.

3. Solve stoichiometry problems, including mass/mass, mass/volume, and volume/volume relationships.

4. Communicate chemical concepts through the use of molecular formulas, structural formulas, and names of compounds.

5. Perform laboratory experiments based on gravimetric, volumetric, qualitative and instrumental analysis techniques and effectively utilize the appropriate experimental apparatus.


1. Administer SLO self survey at end of class (SLOs 1-5)

2. Evaluate Exam #2 scores (directly relates to SLO 3) (No longer used starting in Fall 2012 when the assessment quiz was first administered instead of looking at exam scores).

3. Evaluate lab or exam scores, as appropriate, for SLOs 2, 4, 5.

4. Administer SLO Assessment Quiz (SLO’s 1, 3 & 4) at the end of class.


Administer surveys at least once per year. The survey should be done for all course sections. Administer SLO Assessment Quiz at the end of every semester for every course section.


The assessment quiz administered in Fall 2012 and Spring 2013 showed that the average correct answers in SLO 1 was 81%, SLO 3 was 73%, and SLO 4 was 92%. The assessment quiz was not given prior to Fall 2012. SLO survey results for Spring 2013 show very high ratings from students in SLOs 1, 3, 4, and 5 (SLO 2 was not included in the survey), with 90% or greater feeling somewhat confident or very confident in each SLO. The area with the lowest number of students reporting feeling very confident was SLO 1 with 33%. SLO 4 and 5 were in the middle with 55% and 50%, respectively. The area with the most students reporting feeling very confident was SLO 3 with 81%. One concern is that only 67% reported that the labs helped them understand important course topics and only 73% reported that lab experiments had a strong or moderate impact on their understanding of the course material.


In the surveys conducted in 2010 and 2011, all 5 SLOs have very high ratings by students (all > 90% of agree and strongly agree), but SLO 1 and SLO 5 have a lower number of strongly agree responses than the other 3 SLO statements. The ranges for strongly agree in SLO 1 and 5 are 38%-54%. SLO 3 is rated the highest, with strongly agree ranging between 61-75%. Evaluation of exam #2, which is nearly entirely focused on SLO 3, shows that 50 of 87 students earn a 70% or higher on material directly related to the outcome. Of the 87 students, 22 of the 36 who score below 70% do not pass the course. This shows that achieving this outcome is highly important for success in the course.


The survey results from spring 2013 has similar results in reported SLO proficiency to the previous surveys, with a slight improvement in SLO 3, which had already reported the highest level of all of the SLOs. The results of the assessment quiz given at the end of Fall 2012 and Spring 2013 semesters does not agree with the students’ reports of proficiency. The lowest level of achievement on the SLO quiz was SLO 3 with an average of 73%. This is the SLO with the highest % of students reporting feeling very confident. This discrepancy may be due to the students being able to solve simple stoichiometry problems, but struggling with more complex problems. The quiz showed a high level of proficiency in SLOs 1 and 4, 81% and 92%, respectively Previous surveys did not specifically address outcomes (see results below). The revised surveys ask students about their achievement on specific examples of outcomes. Over the 2 years of Spring ’10-Fall ’11, student surveys show that students are less proficient at SLO 1 and SLO 5 and very high in SLO 3. Students are exposed to SLO 3 content throughout the semester and this may lead to the higher results. SLO 1 material is at the end of the semester, and students do not have as much practice with the material.


Fall 2013: The low level of achievement in SLO 3 on the assessment quiz is not surprising, given that it is among the most challenging material covered in the course. Improvement in student success in this area may be achieved by including more questions related to stoichiometry and thermochemistry in Mastering Chemistry assignments later in the semester to reinforce those concepts well after they have been covered on exams. Students report a low comfort level with SLO 1, while their achievement on the assessment quiz was 81%. As stated in the previous CPAS, this is most likely due to the fact that this material is covered later in the semester, not giving the students very much time to master the material. The low comfort level with SLO 1 may also result from the ineffectiveness of Mastering Chemistry to supply an easy interface for students to draw Lewis structures and molecular models. It may be beneficial to develop paper assignments for the students covering these topics. Fall 2011: Students need more practice at material related to SLO 1, and the link between lab and lecture remains unclear for many students. The new problem solving class may help with success and retention, and mastery of outcomes. Chemistry faculty will discuss these issues in Fall 2012. The chemistry faculty have adopted Mastering Chemistry, and online homework system, as of Fall 2011. Efforts should be made to utilize this system towards the end of a semester to capture direct assessment data connected to SLOs.


Faculty discussed the plans for improvement of the assessment quiz during a meeting in Spring 2013. Faculty discussed methods for improving student learning in some areas during a meeting in Fall 2013. Faculty will discuss the results of the assessments, and future plans for direct assessment by email and at informal meetings after physical sciences division meetings during fall 2012.

Previous results: Assessment results from exit survey: Administered at the end of the semester, data is for 4 class sections over 2 years, 200+ students (2006 and 2007).

1. 92% of students respond that homework helps them achieve better exam and quiz scores. 2. 78% respond that labs help them learn and understand course objectives. 3. 54% respond that the course has helped them improve their mathematical problem solving skills 4. 78% respond that the course has helped them improve their conceptual problem solving skills 5. 39 of 44 (89%) of Spring 2006 students respond that the course has helped to scientifically interpret and evaluate numerical information. Plans for improvement based on exit surveys: 1. develop ways to track why students feel moderate improvement in their mathematical problem solving skills 2. increase ties between labs to lecture material 3. tabulate accumulated data and develop forms for lab skills Results from Spring 2007 1A final (53 students). 1. Outcome 1, 3, question 41, acetylene burning stoichiometry question: 38 proficient, 14 non-proficient (72%). 2. Outcome 1, 3, question 44, non and weak electrolyte, 33 proficient, 19 non-proficient (62%) 3. Overall final exam: 74.3% average, stdev 13.9 4. Overall, 7 of 53 (13%) students passing course earned below 69% the final. Increase final weight, raise C level to 72%.


Division: Physical Sciences Program: Chemistry Date: September 2013 v. 3 2012

Courses in program, or course: __Course: Chem 201B________________________________________________________________

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Praveen Babu, Bret Clark, Greg Baxley, Lara Baxley Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes__X___ No______


□ Program

●Course

1. Use chemical evidence to develop a qualitative analysis scheme, and use the scheme for the determination of unknown cations in solution.

2. Evaluate and interpret numerical and chemical scientific information, including the determination of a rate law or equilibrium constant based on experimental data.

3. Solve mathematical problems in chemistry, including stoichiometry, dilution, equilibrium constants, rate laws, electrochemistry, and energetics.

4. Communicate chemical concepts through the use of molecular formulas, structural formulas, and names of compounds.

5. Perform laboratory experiments based on gravimetric, volumetric, and instrumental analysis techniques and effectively utilize the appropriate experimental apparatus and technology.


1. Administer SLO self survey on last day of class (SLOs 1-5)

2. Administer ACS general chemistry exam during last week (counts for 2 quiz scores) (SLOs 2-5)

3. Using simple rubric, determine how many students successfully complete a qualitative analysis scheme (SLO 1)

4. SLO 5: use rubric to determine effectiveness in graphing on 2nd

equilibrium lab


Administer each element during spring semester (largest number of students enrolled.


Survey data attached. For Sp 2010, 43 of 44 students successfully identified at least 4 of 5 cations. Spring 2011, 52 of 59 students successfully identified at least 4 of 5 cations. Assessment results from American Chemical Society 2 hour exam, mix of conceptual and algorithmic problems:

a. Administered at the end of the semester, data is for 2 class sections in Sp 09, a very strong class of 36 students taking the exam. Class average Spring 09 is 76

th percentile, higher than typical range of 70-

74 percentile (74 in Sp 07). 83% of students above 50th percentile (77% in Sp 07) 19% of students above 90th percentile (14% in Sp 07)


b. Data for Sp 2010, class average is 69

th percentile (dropping lowest 3 scores raises average to 74

th

percentile) Sp 2010, 25% of students score in 90th percentile or above

c. Fall 2011: 18 of 39 above 75th percentile d. Fall 2011: average raw score 43.4 = 72nd percentile e. Fall 2011: 10 of 39 above 90th percentile f. Spring 2012 SLO: 18 of 60 above 90

th percentile, average percentile is 76

th in SLO

g. Spring 2012 NCC: 3 of 17 above 90th percentile, average percentile is 71

st )

h. Fall 2012 SLO average is 43.0, 76th percentile, 9 of 42 above 90th percentile (21.4%)

i. Spring 2013 NCC average is 44, 77th percentile, with 4 of 14 (28.6%) above the 90

th percentile

j. Spring 2013 SLO average is 45.3, 80th percentile, with 17 of 64 (26.6%) above the 90

th percentile

SLO 5: 31 of 39 (79%) of students scored “very good” (or 4/5 and above) on a graphing rubric for a calibration curve on a spectroscopy lab. (Spring 2012) Graphing rubric in Spring 2011 shows that 79% of students were proficient in graphing techniques.


Students feel less confident in the qualitative analysis SLO than others., although students are very successful with the qualitative analysis experiment. Data show that Cuesta 1B students do significantly better than average students taking the ACS exam. Chemistry problem solving abilities are strong. The graphing rubric pilot from 2011 shows that nearly 80% of students are capable of producing effective graphs.


Student self survey data for Sp 10 shows low agreement with SLO 1 (qual scheme, only 36% strongly agree). Work to improve prelab or add one more qual scheme lab (in place of hard water lab?) Sample graphs could be provided to Chem 201B students to evaluate. This is done in Chem 201A, and could be repeated in Chem 201B.


Faculty discussed the results of the ACS exam and the student survey at an informal meeting after a division meeting in Fall 2011, and in Fall 2013..




Division: Physical Sciences Program: Chemistry Date: May 2013 v. 3 2012

Courses in program, or course: __Course: Chem 201X________________________________________________________________

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Greg Baxley, Lara Baxley Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes__X___ No______


□ Program

●Course

6. Apply concepts learned in Chemistry 201A to an array of new problems.

7. Develop problem-solving and computational skills, including analyzing information in typical written chemistry problems to determine solution pathways.

8. Evaluate and critique problem solving methods, including the methods of other students.


1. Administer SLO self survey at end of class (SLOs 1-3)


Administer surveys at least once per year. The survey should be done for all course sections. Develop assessment rubrics for direct assessments.


Surveys were administered to 25 students in 201X in 2011-2012. All 25 report that the class helped their problem solving skills. Only 6 of 25 reported that the class made the difference between failing and passing. Survey was administered online in Spring 2013. Of the 16 students enrolled in the class, 13 participated in the survey. All 13 students reported that the class helped their problem solving skills and 4 (33.3%) reported that Chem 201X helped them pass or stay in Chem 201A. Complete results of this survey are located on the Physical Sciences G: drive in the same folder as the chemistry CPAS forms.


Spring 2012: Students were overly positive about their experience in the class. Several students asked if it would be available for other chemistry courses, and several asked for a class to be available in other disciplines (math, bio). Spring 2013: Students were again very positive about the course and strongly recommended it for other students.


Spring 2012: Several students commented that a short worksheet, or 1-2 homework problems would promote their success. This should be considered in the future. Spring 2013: The only thing that students asked for was more of the same. Two recommended a longer class period and one requested more practice problems. Most, however, felt that the class was right on target.

7 Description or evidence of The results of the survey were shared with a new faculty member to guide plans for improvement in fall 2012. Spring 2013: The two faculty who have taught this course have discussed the changes that were made to the


dialog among course or program-level faculty about assessment plan and results

course this academic year and the results of the surveys. No major changes are planned for next year.


Division: Physical Sciences Program: Chemistry Date: 10/15/2013

Courses in program, or course: __Chem 210FL Introductory Chemistry________________

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Alexandra Kahane, Katherine Jimison Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes_X___ No______


□ Program

X Course

1. Understand and use chemical laws to: a. Solve chemical problems using mathematics and dimensional analysis and, b. Explain the observed chemical and physical behavior of matter 2. Understand the information given on the Periodic Table of Elements and apply it to: a. Describe atomic structure b. Predict the chemical properties of individual elements and c. Predict the reactivity of various elements 3. Communicate chemical concepts such as bonding, the physical states of matter, and stoichiometry

through atomic symbols, molecular formulas, chemical equations, nomenclature, structural formulas, and the concept of the mole.

4. Safely perform chemical laboratory experiments to obtain data and visualize chemical concepts using specialized chemical laboratory equipment.


Administer SLO quiz containing multiple choice problems designed to assess SLOs in all class sections during weeks 17-18 of the Fall 2012 semester (SLOs 1b, 3). Quiz also contains student self assessment questions (SLOs 1b, 3).


3. The students’ score on the SLO Quiz will be counted as a quiz score for the class. The first page of the quiz is designed to have students write their name on it and show their work so they will be motivated to do well on it. Attached is a second page containing a scannable sheet that students will use to report a copy of their answers. This scannable page used to report scores is anonymous. After students complete the quiz, individual faculty will remove and retain the first page (quiz containing students’ name and work) and use it to improve their individual teaching. The anonymous scannable page containing only student answers from all sections of the course will be gathered and analyzed together for a course wide assessment of SLOs. This “half-blind” system allows individual faculty to do their own personal analysis of the assessment data from just their students to improve their teaching, as well as providing course-wide data. The anonymous nature of the scannable page used to gather course-wide data eliminates any possibility of individual faculty being singled out based on their class’ performance. The “half-blind” system was imperative in getting all of the many faculty that teach this course to agree to participate in course-wide SLO assessment.


4. The process will be repeated in subsequent semesters until all SLOs have been assessed. 5. Each year, the quiz will be administered to approximately 275 students in 12 sections of Chem 210FL.

These classes are taught by 8-10 different instructors comprised of both part-time and full-time faculty on both the SLO and NC campuses.


Quiz/survey data located on Physical Sciences G-Drive in the same folder as the CPAS. Assessment results from 222 students in 10 sections on both campuses.

Outcome 1b: 79.28% correct response rate with 73.87% of students reporting their understanding as fairly well or very well.

Outcome 3 (mole concept): 62.16% correct response rate with 73.87% of students reporting their understanding as fairly well or very well.

Outcome 3 (nomenclature formula writing): 58.56% correct response rate with 72.97% of students reporting their understanding as fairly well of very well.

Outcome 3 (nomenclature name writing): 77.93% correct response rate with 72.97% of students reporting their understanding as fairly well of very well.

Outcome 3 (stoichiometry): 83.33% correct response rate with 78.38% of students reporting their understanding as fairly well of very well.


With the exceptions of the mole concept and nomenclature formula writing where students overestimate their understanding (62.16% correct response vs 73.87% confidence; and 58.56% correct response vs 72.97% confidence respectively), students report confidence levels that mirror their correct response rate. Correct response rates for outcomes 1b, 3 (nomenclature name writing), and 3 (stoichiometry) are at acceptable levels. Outcomes 3 (nomenclature formula writing) and 3 (mole concept) are lower than our preferred level of achievement for those skills. It is worth noting that our highest level of achievement is with outcome 3 (stoichiometry) with 83.33% correct response rate with 78.38% confidence. In our last assessment this the weakest SLO assessed at 71.89% correct response rate with 75.11% confidence. Execution of our plan for improvement involved implementing two weekly Facilitator Assisted Learning assignments devoted to stoichiometry instead of the one assignment previously allotted for the topic. During the Fall 2012 assessment quiz/survey, the same stoichiometry question was used to determine that change raised the correct response rate for this outcome.


Beginning Spring 2014, additional nomenclature practice will be introduced later in the semester during the Solutions Facilitator Assisted Learning assignment. During the Spring 2014 assessment quiz/survey, the same nomenclature question will be used to determine if this change raises the correct response rate for this outcome. The proficiency for the mole concept tested low during the Fall 2012 assessment cycle. Because students generally show proficiency on this topic during assignment, quiz, and test questions, we will reassess this SLO during the Spring 2014 cycle to determine if there was an issue with the particular

question used, or if there is indeed a deficiency in this concept.


Discussions of quiz/survey results occurred at Chem 210FL Instructors Meetings during the 2012-2013 year. At the September 2013 meeting, the decision was made to add the additional nomenclature practice during the Solutions assignment.




Division: Physical Sciences Program: Chemistry Date: March 9, 2012 v. 3 2012

Courses in program, or course: CHEM 211 Introductory Organic and Biochemistry

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Praveen Babu Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes__X__ No______


□ Program

■ Course

1. Explain the theory and concepts of carbon-based chemistry and how these are affected by chemical structure (e.g., molecular shapes, bonding, and chirality/stereoisomerism).

2. Communicate the language of organic chemistry using International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) nomenclature and representations of molecules specific to organic chemistry (e.g., line angle formulas, Fischer projections, Haworth projections, etc)..

3. Apply acquired knowledge about chemical functional groups to predict the physical and chemical properties of organic and biochemical molecules.

4. Describe the composition and function(s) of biochemical pathways. 5. Safely perform chemical laboratory experiments to demonstrate chemical concepts, synthesize various

functional groups, and analyze chemical samples using specialized chemical laboratory equipment.


1. Assigned homework problems (SLOs 1-4) 2. Quiz questions (SLOs 1-2, 4) 3. Examination questions (SLOs 1-4) 4. Laboratory experiments (SLO 5) 5. Laboratory reports (SLOs 1-3) 6. Final Examination questions (SLOs 1-4) 7. Final Report (Students create a summary spreadsheet/notebook of functional groups, molecules, and

biochemical processes covered throughout entire course for submission on the last day of course; SLOs 1-4)


Administer each element during Fall semesters. Instructor (PB) only teaches CHEM 211 during Fall semesters.


For the Fall 2011 semester, emphasis of analysis was placed on student learning outcomes 1 and 2. Student data pertaining to the assessment methods plans (AMPs) provided above that analyze SLOs 1-2 is as follows: AMP 1: 95.45% of the students assessed successfully completed assigned homework problems pertaining to SLOs 1-2. AMP 2: 74.07% of the students assessed successfully completed quiz questions pertaining to SLOs 1-2.


AMP 3: 75.20% of the students assessed successfully completed examination questions pertaining to SLOs 1-2. AMP 5: 97.00% of the students assessed successfully completed exercises pertaining to laboratory experiments in their laboratory reports that directly measure SLOs 1-2. AMP 6: 87.25% of the students assessed successfully completed final examination questions pertaining to SLOs 1-2. AMP 7: 91.10% of the students assessed successfully completed a Final Report illustrating their abilities to fulfill the requirements set forth in SLOs 1-2.


Students are very confident in their abilities to draw relationships between biological organisms and carbon-based chemistry by the end of the course. A particular example of this is that 98% of students assessed were able to clearly link the presence of cis and trans bonds in the hydrocarbon portion of a fatty acid to chemical and physical properties of unsaturated fats.

Students also feel strongly that by the end of the course, they are able to identify organic chemicals via multiple methods (e.g., line angle formulas, Fischer & Haworth projections, etc.). Students are slightly less confident in their ability to name these compounds using proper IUPAC rules, but very confident that they can name simpler compounds.


The current assessment cycle has revealed that students are successfully learning chemical formulas, structural formulas, and the like, but are less confident in their ability to properly name the many forms of compounds that are presented throughout the course. This was apparent prior to the current assessment cycle and prompted the implementation of the Final Report in assessment method plan (AMP) 7. Even with AMP 7 in place for the last 3 years the course has been taught, this cycle has made it apparent that more weight should placed on IUPAC nomenclature.


Faculty discussions regarding teaching methods and assessments regularly occur during division meetings and other informal meetings.




Division: Physical Science Program: Chemistry Date: May 19, 2012 v. 3 2012

Courses in program, or course: __Chem 212A________________________________________________________________

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Katherine Jimison Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes__X___ No______


□ Program

□ Course

1. Predict the chemistry and physical properties of a substance based on molecular structure and molecular theory.

2. Evaluate and interpret numerical chemical data. 3. Predict products and write mechanisms of Electrophilic addition, Nucleophilic substitution, and elimination

reactions. 4. Write molecule names and structures using IUPAC Nomenclature. 5. Draw conformations and stereoisomers of hydrocarbons. 6. Safely perform organic chemistry lab experiments utilizing appropriate apparatus and glassware. 7. Safely separate and analyze the products of an organic chemistry lab experiment using appropriate

qualitative and instrumental techniques including melting point, thin layer, column, and gas chromatography.


Using simple rubric, determine how many students successfully complete SLO 1-5, Chem 212A including analysis of the Fall 2010 and Fall 2011 midterm exams and final exam as follows:

6. SLO 1: Midterm/Final exam questions 2,3,7a,7b 7. SLO 3: Midterm/Final exam questions 3,4,8a-d,13 8. SLO 4: Midterm/Final exam questions 11, 12, 13 9. SLO 5: Midterm/Final exam questions 14, 3ab, 6ab


Each Fall semester, the midterm exams and final exams will be assessed. There are approximately 18 students

enrolled each fall. The process will be repeated in subsequent semesters and the data aggregated. Beginning Fall 2012, SLO 2 and 5 will be assessed based on student lab notebooks and reports



Assessment results from 33 students in one section each Fall 2010 and Fall 2011. Level of achievement of Outcome 1: Very Well 44%, Fairly Well 24%, Somewhat 31%, Slightly or Not at All 1% Level of achievement of Outcome 3: Very Well 54%, Fairly Well 24%, Somewhat 17%, Slightly or Not at All 5% Level of achievement of Outcome 4: Very Well 42%, Fairly Well 29%, Somewhat 8%, Slightly or Not at All 0% . Level of achievement of Outcome 5: Very Well 68%, Fairly Well 22%, Somewhat 7%, Slightly or Not at All 3% .


Data show that Cuesta Chem 212A students successfully complete SLO 1, 3, 4, 5. It would be helpful to correlate this data with the ACS Organic Chemistry exam given in Spring 2012 as many of the questions directly measure achievement of these outcomes. A student self-assessment survey would also give some insight as to students’ perception of outcome achievement.


The current assessment cycle has revealed that students are successfully learning the concepts needed to meet outcomes 1, 3-5. Additional data would be helpful as well as the assessment of outcomes 2 and 6.


Faculty discussions regarding teaching methods and assessments regularly occur informally between the two instructors teaching Chem 212. Currently only one instructor is teaching the first semester, Chem 212A. However, student success and readiness for Chem 212B is often discussed in order to determine whether improvements and changes are needed in Chem 212A.




Division: Physical Sciences Program: Chemistry Date: March 2, 2012 v. 2 2012

Courses in program, or course: __Chem 212B Organic Chemistry________________________________________

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: _Katherine Jimison___________________________________________ Course to program outcome mapping document** is completed: Yes__X___ No______


□ Course

8. Predict the products and write the mechanisms of electrophilic aromatic substitution, nucleophilic acyl substitution and addition/elimination reactions.

9. Write multi-step synthesis using retrosynthetic analysis. 10. Identify functional groups using IR spectroscopy. 11. Deduce molecular structure using IR spectroscopy, mass spectrometry, and NMR spectrometry. 12. Describe and draw the structure of addition polymers, monosaccharides, disaccharides, polysaccharides,

amino acids, and proteins. 13. Safely perform organic chemistry lab experiments utilizing appropriate apparatus and glassware. 14. Safely analyze the product of an organic chemistry lab experiment using appropriate qualitative analysis

techniques including melting point, chromatography, and spectroscopy.


1. Administer SLO self survey during last week of class (SLOs 2-7) 2. Administer and assess course tests throughout the semester (SLOs 2-5) 3. Assess written lab reports throughout the semester (SLOs 6-7)


Administer each element of assessment during spring semester as Chem 212B is typically offered only during the spring semester.


Students completed the self-assessment survey during Spring 2011. Of the 6 outcomes surveyed, 83% of the students achieved 5 of 6 outcomes at the “Fairly Well” or above. All of the students achieved 5 of 6 outcomes at the “Somewhat” or above. Test questions and lab reports were used to directly assess SLOs 2-7. These confirmed the student self assessment with 83% of the students successfully achieving these outcomes.


6 Recommended Changes & Plans for Implementation of


Improvements


Prior to Spring 2012, only one instructor has been teaching Chem 212B. Beginning Spring 2012, another instructor will be assessing the SLOs. Discussion of the data and results along with plans for implementation of improvements will follow.




Division: Physical Sciences Program: Chemistry Date: 5/2/2012 v. 3 2012

Courses in program, or course: __Chem 243________________

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Bret Clark Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes_X___ No______


□ Program

x Course

3. Review Chem 210FL topics to reestablish proficiency 4. Establish groups to maximize discussion time 5. Maintain gradebook and weekly records of student participation


Students will be assessed via Facilitator Feedback forms completed by the students in their section. This form rates the effectiveness of the student facilitators using a five point scale. Students produce a weekly Excel file that is analyzed by the instructor for completeness and adherence to an established format. Students complete packets containing sample problems from the Chem 210FL course.


6. Facilitator Feedback forms are administered by the ninth week of instruction. They are administered in all sections (which vary in size from three to eighteen students). All facilitators are assessed. The number of facilitators typically ranges from eighteen to twenty-four.

7. Excel files are analyzed weekly for errors, completeness, and format. 8. Students complete four packets at times generally spread throughout the semester. 9. Students are polled during the four meetings to establish if proficiency is met.


Facilitator Feedback Form Analysis: Assessment results for 29 students on both campuses. Outcome 1: Each facilitator demonstrated proficiency in Chem 210FL. This was verified by the completion of

each of the four packets and discussion of the correct answers. Outcome 2: Students were polled during each scheduled class meeting about the group dynamics. In

addition, specific questions on the Facilitator Feedback forms were analyzed to determine outcome # 2. Overall, students scored 4.0 out of five points on the Feedback Forms. This placed them at “meets expectation”.

Outcome # 3: 79.3% of the facilitators maintained their gradebooks consistently on a weekly basis. 5 Discussion of Assessment

Procedure and Results, and Effectiveness of Previous Improvement Plans

Students are proficient in Outcome # 1. Outcomes 2 and 3 can be improved. Due to the limited number of class meeting times, assessments are limited to those times and via electronic communication.

6 Recommended Changes & Plans for Implementation of

Beginning Fall 2012, additional activities will be established to increase facilitator proficiency in establishing groups. This will include some role-playing during the first meeting time. Gradebook proficiency will be


Improvements increased by emphasizing gradebook procedures during the first scheduled meeting time. In addition, facilitators will be required to contact the instructor during the third week at an established meeting time to go over any issues that may have arisen regarding class procedures.


Discussions occurred during the Spring 2012 semester between both instructors who teach the course. They will continue to collaborate together and obtain feedback from instructors on the effectiveness of the course.


