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

Leeward Community College

December 23, 2013

 

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

1.         Accounting (ACC)

2.         Automotive Technology (AMT)

3.         Business Technology (BTEC)

4.         Culinary Arts (CULN)

5.         Digital Media (DMED)

6.         Hawaiian Studies (HWST)

7.         Health Information Technology (HIT)

8.         Information and Computer Science (ICS)

9.         Liberal Arts (LBRT)

10.       Management (MGT)

11.       Natural Science

12.       Substance Abuse Counseling (SUBS)

13.       Teaching (TCH)

14.       Television Production (TVPR).

15.       Remedial/Developmental Math

16.       Remedial/Developmental Reading

17.       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 and Some Analysis

Five programs--ACC, CULN, ICS, SUBS, TVPR—remained “Healthy” from the previous year—CULN for the last five years—and were joined by Remedial/ Developmental Writing.

Previously rated “Cautionary,” Remedial/Developmental Writing became “Healthy” when the number enrolling in Developmental Writing increased by 6%percentage while the size of the Achieving the Dream cohort for 2012-2013 decreased by 3%.  The net effect was a “Healthy” 4 percentage point increase (to 40%) in the percentage of the cohort enrolling in Developmental Writing.

Eight--AMT, BUS, DMED, HIT, LBRT, MGT, Remedial/Developmental Math, and Remedial/Developmental Reading—remained “Cautionary” and were joined by TCH and a new program, HIT.

TCH’s downgrade from “Healthy” to “Cautionary” was primarily due to a peculiar problem:  it has grown very rapidly in the past seven years—1,595% and slowed down recently, increasing by 2.5% in the last academic year.  But it is being evaluated using the LBRT protocol, so a 3% or better growth rate is required for Demand to be considered Healthy.  At the same time, the program has acquired so many majors in so short a space of time that its majors to faculty ratio is too high—about 97:1—making its Efficiency also “Cautionary.”

HIT came on-line “Cautionary” because while Demand was “Healthy,” its Fill Rate (about 66%) is “Cautionary” and its Majors to Faculty ratio is (technically) 28:0 because HIT has no faculty of its own.  While its Persistence is very “Healthy” at 84.6%, it has 0 degrees or certificates awarded (it has only been in existence for a year), and so Efficiency and Effectiveness are rated “Cautionary.”

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

HWNST and NSC are new programs.  How they should be evaluated is currently under discussion.  For now, they are considered part of the LBRT program.  As such, they do not have separate Health calls.

The table below summarizes how the various programs have been rated over the last three years.

Program Health

2011

2012

2013

Healthy

BTEC

CULN

LBRT

ACC

CULN

ICS

SUBS

TCH

TVPR

ACC

CULN

ICS

SUBS

TVPR

Rem/Dev Writing

Cautionary

ACC

AMT

DMED

ICS

MGT

SUBS

TCH

TVPR

AMT

BTEC

DMED

LBRT

MGT

Rem/Dev Math

Rem/Dev Reading

Rem/Dev Writing

AMT

BUS

DMED

HIT

LBRT

MGT

TCH

Rem/Dev Math

Rem/Dev Reading

Unhealthy

 

 

 

To Be Determined

Rem/Dev Math

Rem/Dev Reading

Rem/Dev Writing

 

HWST

NSCI

 

 

 

The Rest of the Analyses

With a tiny increase in the number of New and Replacement Positions, the correction to its FTE BOR-Appointed Faculty count, and about the same number of majors as last year, ACC has maintained a “Healthy” Demand rating.  Some concern has arisen because of the change in the CIP code, but we will not know the effects until next year.  Although the Student to Faculty ratio (50:1) is “Cautionary,” the Fill Rate is well into the “Healthy” range.  One major concern is Persistence (down 6 percentage points), and while there was a 30% increase in the number of certificates and degrees awarded, completion is still another major concern.

AMT’s Demand and Effectiveness indicators continue to fall into the “Unhealthy” or “Cautious” ranges.  Future employment is a key factor in evaluating Demand and numbers of students earning degrees and/or certificates a key factor in evaluating Effectiveness.  However, a large percentage of AMT majors, it has been claimed, already have jobs in the automotive field and a smaller percentage do not or cannot enter that field.  In the past year, the number of majors has increased about 7.5%, and, while the number of openings has gone up 61%, the absolute number of New and Replacement Positions is still relatively small--29.  Although it missed the Perkins’ 2P1 mark for Completion by 10 percentage points (40% instead of 50% or better), the number of students earning degrees and certificates has increased 28% in 2011-2012 and 38% in 2012-2013.  The number of degrees has, itself, gone up by 50% in 2012-2013.

In BTEC, the number of New and Replacement Positions surged in 2011-2012 when a change in CIP took effect and almost tripled the number of positions to 197.  Meanwhile the number of majors decreased:  by 8% in 2012-2013.  The 4.6:1 Major to Faculty ratio crossed the line by a fraction of a point into the “Cautious” range.  While the Efficiency ratings are clearly “Healthy,” the declining Persistence rates—going from 69% in 2011, to 65% in 2012, then to 60% in 2013—and the percentage of majors earning degrees (22%) falling far short of a “Healthy” 75% are troubling.  It is entirely possible that at least part of the decreasing Persistence rate could be accounted for by the increasing percentage of students completing the program.  It is possible that students are indeed leaving the program as jobs have become less scarce, but we ought to (a) discover what is happening and (b) realign program goals and resources to fit reality.

CULN continues “Healthy” as the number of New and Replacement Positions has increased by 75%.  The number of majors has risen only by 3.5%.  It continues to maintain a “Healthy” Fill Rate and Majors to Faculty ratio.  While Demand and Efficiency are “Healthy,” Effectiveness has declined:  persistence has decreased—this time by about 7%.  The number of students awarded degrees or certificates has also decreased--32% below the number for the previous year.  The surge in certificates earned in 2011-2012 was caused by program faculty and the counselor pushing students to apply for certificates.

DMED still suffers from the drop in the number of New and Replacement Positions—currently 2, county-wide—even as the number of majors has increased by 14.4% to 175.  The problem was not fixed in 2012-13 by changing the CIP and SOC codes associated with DMED majors.  The Dean and Program Head are still in the process of deciding the proper CIP classification to use.  Demand remains “Unhealthy.”  To complicate the situation, most of the workers in DMED jobs hold at least Bachelor’s Degrees.  A much smaller percentage find employment with an AS degree.

The program was moved to another division—PAT—and the faculty reclassified.  However, with only two full-time faculty members, the Majors to Faculty ratio—87.5:1—is still “Unhealthy,” keeping the Efficiency “Cautionary.”

The successful completion rate is “Healthy,” as is the Persistence rate.  And this past year, the number of students awarded degrees or certificates increased by 48%.  Yet because of the large number of majors, the ratio of degree/certificate earners to majors is 0.6 less than 20% and so “Cautionary.”   The ratio of degree/certificate earners to positions—175/2 or 87.5:1—is “Unhealthy.

ICS Demand has remained “Healthy” since the number of New and Replacement positions has increased 87%.  ICS has 7% more majors, but those majors have taken 36% more SSHs in program classes in 2012-2013 than in 2011-2012.  In other words, majors are taking more courses in the program.  With improved Effectiveness, marked by a 79% successful completion rate (4 percentage points higher than in the previous year’s), ICS majors should be moving more efficiently toward completion.  In fact, while the number of majors has increased by only 7%, the number of majors awarded certificates and/or degrees increased 42%.

The slow down in LBRT program growth seems to have slowed down.  The decrease in the number of majors was about -3% in 2011-12.  In 2012-13, the decrease amounted to -1.6%.  At the same time, the number of SSHs taken by LBRT majors increased by about 1%.  The successful completion rate remains about the same, as well as the Fall-to-Spring persistence.  But once again, the number of persons awarded degrees and certificates and the number of AA degrees awarded increased—not as much as it did in 2011-12 (by almost 10%) but by a little more than 6%.  These numbers might not indicate a completely negative situation.  It may be that students are becoming clearer about their choices and choosing not to declare a LBRT major if they really want to do something else.  Meanwhile, those who are actually intent on majoring in LBRT are taking more credits in program courses and completing in 2012-13 about 6% more degrees and certificates.  The number of majors transferring to a four-year institution without a degree decreased 15%.  However, the number of those transferring with a degree increased by 12%.  Again, that points to a possible shift, albeit a slight shift, in the way students are choosing and following through with the major.

In this last year, there has been a 14.5% increase in the number of majors but a 33.8% increase in the number of new and replacement positions.  As a result, MGT is still considered “Unhealthy” in terms of Demand.  To be considered “Healthy,” MGT would have had to have had a 126% increase in the number of majors.  For the second year, the ratio of unduplicated degrees and certificates to majors is well into the “Healthy” level (75/150, or about 50%), but the ratio of degrees and certificates to new and replacement positions is considered “Unhealthy” (75/507, or about 15%).  Persistence continues to be “Cautionary,” but it has been increasing over the last three years—moving from 63.2% to 69.5%.  That last rate is just 0.5% less than a “Healthy” 70%.  MGT continues to have a high Fill Rate.  The successful completion rate, which has reached a satisfactory level, has been rising gradually every year—from 69% to 73%.

NSCI, a new program, currently comes under the umbrella of LBRT.  It is, by default, then, “Healthy.”  Discussions are currently underway to determine how to provide a useful set of data that could be used to manage and assess program health.

SUBS continues to be “Healthy” in all aspects of the evaluation.  The 21% growth in 2011-12 has been maintained in 2012-13.  The class Fill Rate remains high as does the successful completion rate—both in the mid-80% range.  Fall-to-Spring persistence has actually improved over the last three years, going from 54% in 2010-11 to 66% in 2012-13.  The number of individuals awarded certification has decreased by about 17%, but this might be a simple one-time fluctuation, and the coordinator has structured support mechanisms to move students to completion.

TCH growth in Demand was a little better than half what it was in the previous year:  2.7% (2011-12:  5%).  But it also just falls short of the specified 3% rate for “Healthy.”  Nevertheless, TCH continues to enjoy a very high fill rate (96%), moderately high successful completion rate (75%), and an unusually high persistence rate (72%).  The number of individuals being certified has increased again—by 7.3%.  The numbers add up to a “Healthy” Effectiveness rating.  However, the early rapid growth of the program and the large number of majors (387) has resulted in “Cautionary” Efficiency—due to the extremely high Majors to Faculty ratio (97:1)..

After being redefined in 2011-12 and a 60% decrease in the number of new and replacement positions (to 12 or 13) and only a slight increase in the number of majors (7.5%), Demand remains “Healthy” for TVPR. The Fill Rate has climbed back to a very high 99% and the Majors to Faculty ratio has remained stable at 22:1, so Efficiency is also “Healthy.”  Persistence remained high (80%), and the percentage of degrees and certificates to majors has increased—from 19/40, or about 48%, to 23/43, or about 54%.  The ratio of degrees and certificates to positions (23 to 12, or about 1.9) seals the “Healthy” rating.

The tentative benchmarks for Developmental Education programs/classes continue to be used.

1.       Demand varied in all three programs:  “Unhealthy” for Math, “Cautionary” for Reading, and “Healthy” for Writing.  All varying from a 0% increase in enrollment rate to a 1% increase and a 4% increse

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.