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

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

Review Year: College:

Leeward Community College Executive Summary Printer Friendly
PDF PDF

 

Summary of Annual Reports of Program Data for Instructional Programs 2012

Leeward Community College

 

Fourteen instructional programs submitted analyses, action plans, and resource implications:

1.         Accounting (ACC)

2.         Automotive Technology (AMT)

3.         Business Technology (BTEC)

4.         Digital Media (DMED)

5.         Culinary (FSER)

6.         Information and Computer Science (ICS)

7.         Liberal Arts (LBRT)

8.         Management (MGT)

9.         Substance Abuse Counseling (SUBS)

10.       Teaching (TCH)

11.       Television Production (TVPR).

12.       Remedial/Developmental Math

13.       Remedial/Developmental Reading

14.       Remedial/Developmental Writing

Student Services and Academic Support Services have also submitted annual reports, not in the same format as the instructional programs.

 

Summary of Program Health

This year, six program ratings were rated “Healthy” overall:  ACC, CULN, ICS, SUBS, TCH, and TVPR,

Five were rated “Cautionary”:  AMT, BUS, DMED, LBRT, MGT

Four programs previously rated “Cautionary”—ACC. SUBS, TCH, and TVPR—became “Healthy.”

Two programs previously “Healthy”—BUS and LBRT—became “Cautionary.”

CULN and ICS remained “Healthy”—CULN for four review cycles.

AMT, DMED, , and MGT remained “Cautionary.”  AMT and MGT have been “Cautionary for the last four years.

For the first time, health calls were issued for Remedial/Developmental programs.  All three have been rated “Cautionary” overall.  All three because of “Unhealthy” ratings in Demand.  In addition, Math and Reading have been rated “Cautionary” in terms of Effectiveness.

 

Analysis

The increase in the number of New and Replacement Positions and ACC’s correction to its FTE BOR-Appointed Faculty count are the main reasons for the reversal of its health call.  On the other hand, the decrease in the number of degrees and certificates awarded has become a concern.

AMT’s demand indicators continue to be a concern.  While the number of majors has increased, the number of New and Replacement Positions has not changed over the last three years and remains low.  The program does attract students who are already employed, but the data on what is happening to the students who are not currently employed and are seeking certification remain sketchy.

BTEC/BUS health calls for demand and effectiveness suffered from two related problems:  a huge increase (more than 100%) in the number of New and Replacement Positions and a continued low rate of degree and certificate completion.

CULN has maintained a “Healthy” rating despite a small decrease in the number of New and Replacement Positions, along with a rise in the number of majors.  It has improved its efficiencies and effectiveness once again and while experiencing a slight decline in persistence has much improved the number of degrees and certificates awarded—doubling the unduplicated count and increasing the number of degrees by a little over 50%.

DMED suffered a disastrous drop in the number of New and Replacement Positions—from 78 to 7 state-wide and 49 to 4 county-wide.  But those reductions are the result of using the wrong SOC code(s) associated with DMED majors.  This problem should be fixed in the coming year.  The program has also been moved to another division—PAT—from Arts and Humanities.  The change might result in a reclassification of faculty so that the 153 DMED majors will not—according to currently entered Banner data—be taught by ZERO BOR-Appointed Faculty.  The number of unduplicated degrees and certificates has declined again, and the number of degrees awarded also remains low.

ICS analysis of its situation and problems and the measures subsequently taken seem to have put the program on the right track.  The number of majors has decreased only slightly while the numbers of degrees and certificates have increased considerably.  The increase in the number of New and Replacement Positions has also contributed to an improved program health rating.

The growth of the LBRT program has been slowing down for the last several years.  However, for the first time, the number of LBRT majors decreased—by about -3%—from the previous year.  The number of SSHs taken by LBRT majors decreased, also by about 3%.  All other numbers remained stable, but the number of persons awarded degrees and certificates and the number of AA degrees awarded increased by almost 10%.

With a 14% decrease in the number of positions, even with a 40% increase in the number of majors, MGT is still considered “Unhealthy” in terms of Demand.  Given the current number of new and replacement positions (379), MGT would have to increase the number of majors by 433% to edge into the “Healthy” demand region.  It would have had to more than double the number of majors from the previous year to slip into “Cautionary.”  While the ratio of unduplicated degrees and certificates to majors is well into the “Healthy” level (60/131, or about 48%), the ratio of degrees and certificates to new and replacement positions is considered “Unhealthy” (60/379, or about 16%).  Persistence is also “Cautionary.”  It is also a concern because the trend is slightly downward—going from 66% in AY 2010 and 63% in 2011 to the current 61%.

With the number of positions down (from 39 in 2011 to 20 in 2012) and the number of majors up (from 29 in 2011 to 35 in 2012), SUBS Demand is “Healthy.”  With a high Fill Rate and more majors, its Efficiency is just within the “Healthy” zone.  The ratios of degrees and certificates to majors and to new and replacement positions are clearly “Healthy.”   Persistence is barely “Cautionary” at 60%.  However, that rate has improved considerably over the previous year’s 54%.

TCH Demand grew at a comfortable 5%.  Its 96% Fill Rate is also “Healthy.”  However, the rapid growth of the program has nudged its Efficiency into the “Cautionary” range:  the ratio of majors to BOR-appointed faculty being now much too high:  377 to 4, or 94.3 to 1.  The high persistence (77%) and the 7% increase in the number of degrees awarded offset the flat transfer rate (no increase from the previous year).

A 60% decrease in the number of new and replacement positions and an 11% decrease in the number of majors resulted in a “Healthy” Demand ratio of TVPR majors to positions.  So while the Fill Rate (73%) dropped into the “Cautionary” zone, the majors to faculty ratio became quite healthy at 20 to 1.  Meanwhile persistence remained high (80%), and the percentage of degrees and certificates to majors (19/40, or about 48%) and ratio of degrees and certificates to positions (19 to 13, or about 1.5) were “Healthy.”

For the first time, benchmarks have been applied to Developmental Education programs/classes.

1.       Efficiency in all three areas—with high fill rates and moderate student to faculty ratios—was deemed “Healthy.”

2.       But Math and Reading—because of low persistence rates and low success rates in subsequent college-level courses—were rated Cautionary “Cautionary” for Effectiveness.  Writing, with a high persistence rate for students one level below college-level came out “Healthy.”

3.       And all three of our areas are “Unhealthy” in terms of Demand.  The percentages of students placing at DevEd level in Math, Reading, and Writing and actually taking an appropriate DevEd course has been declining each year for the last several years.

          We might need to reconsider this benchmark.  All three areas had slight to significant increases in enrollment.  DevEd Math had a large increase (about 11%) in SSHs, but the AtD cohort calculations indicate decreases in all three areas of Remedial/Developmental programs.

 

Actions

The Student Success Initiative goals will continue to serve as the foci of our efforts:

Increase the number of graduates and transfers in all areas by 25%

Eliminate Gatekeeper courses

Improve student success rates by 10% in all courses with success rates less than 70%

Decrease time spent in remedial/developmental courses to one year or less

But in addition, the goals arising from Complete College American and the Hawaii Graduation Initiative have come to the fore.

Hence, many of the measures in the Action Plans of the various programs are meant to move students more quickly and efficiently to completion and transfer.