University of Hawaii Community Colleges
Instructional Annual Report of Program Data (ARPD)

Select the desired review year, college, and program from the drop down menus. Once a program has been selected, the results will be displayed.

Review Year: College: Program:

College: Honolulu Community College
Program: Occupational & Environmental Safety Management

Printer Friendly

PDF PDF
The last comprehensive review for this program was on 2010. STEM Program

Program Description

Program Mission:

The Occupational & Environmental Safety Management program’s mission is to:

Program Description:

Occupational/Environmental Safety and Health is a growing field.

The curriculum offers a broad background on safety and health program administration, workplace hazard recognition/evaluation/control, emergency preparedness, workers’ compensation principles, hazardous chemical risk assessment, and environmental management. Besides an Associate Degree, the program offers a Certificate of Achievement in OESM. Since the OESM Program is fully articulated with these institutions, its graduates may obtain a baccalaureate degree in the following areas:

In addition, six OESM courses are articulated with regulatory classes provided by the OSHA Training Institute (OTI) Educational Center at Chabot-Las Positas Community College District. Students who have completed these classes at the “C” grade or better will earn the following OSHA certificates:

Graduates from the OESM program are qualified to work as occupational safety and health inspectors, safety officers, and environmental technicians in governmental agencies and private industries including construction, healthcare, utilities, transportation, environmental management, insurance, education, etc. Job placement opportunities are announced throughout the year.

 

 

Part I. Quantitative Indicators

Overall Program Health: Cautionary

Majors Included: OESM     Program CIP: 15.0701

Demand Indicators Program Year Demand Health Call
10-11 11-12 12-13
1 New & Replacement Positions (State) 14 11 13 Unhealthy
2 *New & Replacement Positions (County Prorated) 12 10 11
3 *Number of Majors 70 78.5 61.5
3a     Number of Majors Native Hawaiian 21 26 20
3b     Fall Full-Time 27% 30% 42%
3c     Fall Part-Time 73% 70% 58%
3d     Fall Part-Time who are Full-Time in System 1% 5% 3%
3e     Spring Full-Time 30% 34% 40%
3f     Spring Part-Time 70% 66% 60%
3g     Spring Part-Time who are Full-Time in System 3% 0% 2%
4 SSH Program Majors in Program Classes 651 780 518
5 SSH Non-Majors in Program Classes 498 442 114
6 SSH in All Program Classes 1,149 1,222 632
7 FTE Enrollment in Program Classes 38 41 21
8 Total Number of Classes Taught 18 18 19

Efficiency Indicators Program Year Efficiency Health Call
10-11 11-12 12-13
9 Average Class Size 21 22.3 11.5 Unhealthy
10 *Fill Rate 75.6% 80.2% 35.6%
11 FTE BOR Appointed Faculty 1 1 1
12 *Majors to FTE BOR Appointed Faculty 70 78.5 61.5
13 Majors to Analytic FTE Faculty 34.4 38.5 33.2
13a Analytic FTE Faculty 2.0 2.0 1.9
14 Overall Program Budget Allocation $131,206 $101,460 $132,134
14a General Funded Budget Allocation $129,977 $79,668 $122,944
14b Special/Federal Budget Allocation $0 $0 $0
14c Tuition and Fees $0 $21,792 $9,190
15 Cost per SSH $114 $83 $209
16 Number of Low-Enrolled (<10) Classes 0 0 7
*Data element used in health call calculation Last Updated: January 27, 2014

Effectiveness Indicators Program Year Effectiveness Health Call
10-11 11-12 12-13
17 Successful Completion (Equivalent C or Higher) 92% 93% 89% Healthy
18 Withdrawals (Grade = W) 6 7 7
19 *Persistence Fall to Spring 70% 78.2% 71.4%
19a Persistence Fall to Fall     55.3%
20 *Unduplicated Degrees/Certificates Awarded 5 11 16
20a Degrees Awarded 5 11 13
20b Certificates of Achievement Awarded 0 0 5
20c Advanced Professional Certificates Awarded 0 0 0
20d Other Certificates Awarded 0 0 0
21 External Licensing Exams Passed   Not Reported Not Reported
22 Transfers to UH 4-yr 2 0 1
22a Transfers with credential from program 1 0 0
22b Transfers without credential from program 1 0 1

Distance Education:
Completely On-line Classes
Program Year  
10-11 11-12 12-13
23 Number of Distance Education Classes Taught 0 0 0  
24 Enrollments Distance Education Classes N/A N/A N/A
25 Fill Rate N/A N/A N/A
26 Successful Completion (Equivalent C or Higher) N/A N/A N/A
27 Withdrawals (Grade = W) N/A N/A N/A
28 Persistence (Fall to Spring Not Limited to Distance Education) N/A N/A N/A

Perkins IV Core Indicators
2011-2012
Goal Actual Met  
29 1P1 Technical Skills Attainment 90.00 100.00 Met  
30 2P1 Completion 50.00 28.57 Not Met
31 3P1 Student Retention or Transfer 74.25 68.33 Not Met
32 4P1 Student Placement 60.00 92.31 Met
33 5P1 Nontraditional Participation N/A N/A N/A
34 5P2 Nontraditional Completion N/A N/A N/A

Performance Funding Program Year  
10-11 11-12 12-13
35 Number of Degrees and Certificates     18  
36 Number of Degrees and Certificates Native Hawaiian     6
37 Number of Degrees and Certificates STEM     18
38 Number of Pell Recipients     25
39 Number of Transfers to UH 4-yr     1
*Data element used in health call calculation Last Updated: January 27, 2014
Glossary | Health Call Scoring Rubric

Part II. Analysis of the Program

PROGRAM HEALTH

This section provides explanations and analysis of the key health indicators: Demand, Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Perkin Core IV Indicators.   In order to provide a broader picture of the program assessment, the following analysis includes quantitative indicators from the previous two academic years of 2010 and 2011.

 

Demand (“Unhealthy”):

The data provided show a low demand for the safety and health professionals during the 2012 academic year.   However, this has not been consistent with Ms Grove’s experiences.

The OESM Program’s Demand of 5.6 (62 OESM Majors divided by 11 Job Vacancies) was considered “Unhealthy”, meaning that there were too few available employment vacancies for the number of OESM majors during the assessment period.  However, the “Unhealthy” rating appeared to be inaccurate for two reasons:

  1. The “Number of Majors” figure did not take into account that about 30% of the OESM majors were fully-employed safety professionals.  These students, many of whom college graduates, were attending schools to improve their technical skills and to advance their career, but not necessarily to obtain a degree or certificate.   If this group of students was excluded from the count, the number of major would be 43 instead of 62.
  2. The provided employment data (eleven vacancies) were grossly underestimated.  Ms Grove has documented at least 50 employment openings between August 2012 and July 2013.  The employers included federal and state government as well as private corporations.  The actual number of job openings was probably larger, since not all employers recruited through Ms Grove. 

Using the more accurate figures, the OESM Program’s Demand should read 0.9 (43 OESM Majors divided by 50 Job Vacancies).  The Demand should be rated as “Healthy”.  There were more job openings than the number of OESM majors.

The employment data provided were also in conflict with a workforce study conducted by the U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).  The Study has projected a shortage of trained safety professionals to fill the future employment demand during the next five years. (National Assessment of the Occupational Safety and Health Workforce, October 2011.  http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/oshworkforce/).

In addition, a study by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics indicated that employment of safety & health practitioners would increase nine percent during the 2006 through 2016 decade.  

In 2010, the CNN Money magazine ranked safety and health profession number twenty-two in its article “The 50 Best Jobs in America”.

 

Efficiency (“Unhealthy”):

Efficiency is evaluated based on two factors: Class Fill Rate and Ratio of Majors to FTE BOR Appointed Faculty.

Several factors affect enrollment numbers.  These include economic situation as well as students’ individual obligations.  Majority of the OESM majors are working adults with personal responsibilities that may not allow them to attend school continuingly.  Enrollment fluctuation is a reflection of these factors.  Unless students are regular tracked, the reasons for not continuing with school cannot be systematically documented.

The strict enforcement of pre-requisite requirements could have also affected a drop in enrollment and class fill rate.  However, this effect should be temporary.

As a condition of employment since 1991, Ms Grove is required to spend approximately half of her time assisting the College with workplace safety compliance and another half on instructional activities.  Taken into account of Ms Grove’s 13-credit teaching load annually, the Ratio of Majors to FTE BOR Appointed Faculty major/FTE faculty count would be approximately 124.

The entire APRD process is managed by the UHCC system in order to standardize the data and health calls.  However, this allows little flexibility and adjustment for the individual college.  For this instance, the data provided were not adjusted for Ms Grove’s instructional workload since the situation is specific only to the Honolulu Community College.  The data and measures would likely to be more meaningful if the APRD process is administered by respective campus IR offices.

 

Effectiveness (“Healthy”):

The program was assigned the “Healthy” designation for effectiveness, meaning that these indicators are acceptable: Persistence Fall to Spring, Ratio of Unduplicated Degrees/Number of Majors, and Ratio of Degrees/Certificates Awarded/New & Replacement Positions (County Prorated).

 

Perkin IV Core Indicators:

Goals for Completion (2P1) and Student Retention (3P1) were not met.  As stated above, OESM majors are non-traditional adult students.  They work full-time and have family obligations that may keep them from attending school continuingly.  These are possible reasons for the lower retention rate.

Part III. Action Plan

The UHCC’s current means of assessing Program’s performance appears to be inappropriate for the OESM Program.  Data that can more reflective of the Program’s performance should include:

Recommendations:

  1. The College systematically conducts annual OESM students’ tracking and employer surveys.  The information obtained will be used to evaluate the Program’s performance including its strength and areas needing improvements.
  2. The College continues to provide funding to replace and upgrade environmental monitoring instruments and safety equipment that meet the current industry need.  The instruments and equipment are an integral part of ensuring that the student’s learning outcome are achieved.
  3. To improve the Program’s Efficiency, the College should establish a permanent full-time non-instructional faculty position whose sole responsibility is to implement the College’s health, safety, and environmental management system.  This position should report directly to the Vice Chancellor of Administrative Services.

Part IV. Resource Implications

All recommended actions listed above require additional financial and staff support.   The “Budget and Request Proposal” form will be submitted to the administration along with this Annual Program Assessment Report.    

Program Student Learning Outcomes

For the 2012-2013 program year, some or all of the following P-SLOs were reviewed by the program:

Assessed
this year?
Program Student Learning Outcomes

1

Yes
Recognize and evaluate workplace and environmental hazards

2

Yes
Recommend control measures and accident prevention strategies

3

Yes
Identify and apply appropriate OSHA/HIOSH and EPA regulatory requirements

4

Yes
Analyze proximate and root causes of work-related accidents

5

Yes
Develop a written accident prevention and safety management program

6

Yes
Conduct training and presentations on occupational/environmental safety & health topics

7

Yes
Exercise choices, explain reasons for choices, and analyze potential consequences when dealing with ethical dilemmas concerning health and safety professionals

8

Yes
Demonstrate necessary knowledge and skills for employment in the field of occupational and environmental safety and health

A) Evidence of Industry Validation

The OESM Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) were originally approved by the Advisory Board in May 2005.  In 2009, it was agreed that the Program SLOs be revisited.   The Board reviewed the existing Program SLOs and provided suggestions via Email during the Spring 2009 semester.  The comments and approval of the Program SLOs were documented in Email communications and minutes of the Spring 2009 meeting on March 5th

B) Expected Level Achievement

Unlike some of the CTE programs at the College, there are no external national certification bodies for occupational & environmental safety curriculum and graduates.   The expected level of competencies for the Program SLOs is determined by the instructors.  All OESM instructors are highly qualified safety and health professionals with years of experience in various industries.  Students are expected to achieve 100% of the Program SLOs in order to graduate with an associate degree.

C) Courses Assessed

All OESM course SLOs are mapped to the Program SLOs (Program Mapping is available upon request).   The Program SLOs are assessed through various methods of course SLO assessments including exam, quiz, essay, report, research paper, group project, homework assignment, presentation, and practical skill demonstration.   Except for OESM 101, all OESM required classes are offered every other semester while OESM electives are rotated every 2-3 semesters.   Approximately, 45% of OESM courses are taught and assessed each semester.   

Since the program is staffed by only one full-time faculty member, most OESM classes are taught by part-time lecturers.  Although SLOs are assessed in all classes, documentation of the assessment has not been systematically documented.  Attempts to encourage and acquire documentation for course SLO assessments started in the Spring 2013 semester and will continue. 

So far, documentation of course SLO assessments are available for these classes: OESM 101, OESM 102, OESM 106, OESM 145, OESM 153, OESM 160, OESM 200, OESM 210, and OESM 218.  

 

D) Assessment Strategy/Instrument

The OESM Program SLOs:

  1. Recognize and evaluate workplace and environmental hazards
  2. Recommend control measures and accident prevention strategies
  3. Identify and apply appropriate OSHA/HIOSH and EPA regulatory requirements
  4. Analyze proximate and root causes of work-related accidents
  5. Develop a written accident prevention and safety management program
  6. Conduct training and presentations on occupational/environmental safety & health topics
  7. Exercise choices, explain reasons for choices, and analyze potential consequences when dealing with ethical dilemmas concerning health and safety professionals
  8. Demonstrate necessary knowledge and skills for employment in the field of occupational and environmental safety and health

The Program SLOs are assessed through the assessment of course SLOs.   Below is a list of Program SLOs assessed, assessment strategies used, and OESM classes that address the specific Program SLOs. 

 

Program SLOs Assessed:

  1. Recognize and evaluate workplace and environmental hazards
  2. Recommend control measures and accident prevention strategies
  3. Identify and apply appropriate OSHA/HIOSH and EPA regulatory requirements

Assessment Strategies Used:

OESM Courses Assessed:

 

Program SLOs Assessed:

  1. Analyze proximate and root causes of work-related accidents

Assessment Strategies Used:

OESM Courses Assessed:

 

Program SLOs Assessed:

  1. Develop a written accident prevention and safety management program

Assessment Strategies Used:

OESM Courses Assessed:

 

Program SLOs Assessed:

  1. Conduct training and presentations on occupational/environmental safety & health topics

Assessment Strategies Used:

OESM Courses Assessed:

 

Program SLOs Assessed:

  1. Exercise choices, explain reasons for choices, and analyze potential consequences when dealing with ethical dilemmas concerning health and safety professionals

Assessment Strategies Used:

OESM Courses Assessed:

 

Program SLOs Assessed:

  1. Demonstrate necessary knowledge and skills for employment in the field of occupational and environmental safety and health

Assessment Strategies Used:

OESM Courses Assessed:

E) Results of Program Assessment

OESM graduates are able to achieve all of the Program SLOs. 

Though not all PLO assessments have been formally documented, employers express satisfaction with the OESM graduates and alumni.  Feedbacks from the OESM graduates and alumni have also been positive.  They feel that what they learn are relevant and help them succeed.   Surveys of employers and OESM graduates/alumni could document the results of the Program SLOs assessment.   Feedback obtained can also be used to further improve the Program SLOs.

 

F) Other Comments

A long-term solution must be developed to assist part-time OESM lecturers on assessment methods and documentation.  These lecturers are full-time safety professionals who teach the OESM classes in the evening and on Saturdays.   Some do not teach continuingly since the OESM electives are offered every three or four semesters.  Addtional documentation requirements could drive these lecturers away.  The OESM Program cannot afford to lose these hightly qualified lecturers.

G) Next Steps

Ms Grove will continue to advise the OESM lecturers to document the assessment of course SLOs.  Understanding Ms Grove's heavy work load, administration has been providing assistance to the lecturers via personal contacts and electronic communications.