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: Hawaii Community College
|
Printer Friendly  PDF
|
The last comprehensive review for this program was on Because the remedial/developmental series in the English Department is not a program, no comprehensive program review is required..
Program Description
The remedial/developmental reading effort at HawCC consists of three writing courses offered by the English Department: English 18, English 20R, and English 21. The courses are designed to prepare students to read effectively for college courses and programs, including certificates and degrees. A significant number of students in the CTE and Liberal Arts divisions depend on remedial/developmental reading courses to support their success. To assist student success, the English Department depends on the interdependence of its reading, writing, and ESL faculty, as well a close working relationship with other departments. Its primary goal is to meet student needs and the needs of the community.
Program Mission
The Associate in Arts Degree Program is designed for students and prepares students for roles as continuing students, family members, employers, employees, and citizens of local and global communities.
Part I. Quantitative Indicators
| Demand Indicators | Program Year | Demand Health Call | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10-11 | 11-12 | 12-13 | |||
| 1 | Enrolled in any Remedial/Developmental | 664 | 638 | 535 | Healthy |
| 2 | Semester Hours Taught | 114 | 114 | 99 | |
| 3 | * Student Semester Hours (SSH) Taught | 2205 | 2109 | 1818 | |
| 4 | Full Time Students (Fall) Enrolled | 263 | 254 | 198 | |
| 5 | Full Time Students (Spring) Enrolled | 179 | 128 | 122 | |
| 6 | Number of Classes Taught | 38 | 38 | 33 | |
| Achieving the Dream | AtD Fall Cohort | ||||
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |||
| 7 | Percent AtD Cohort with Placement | 90% | 95% | 93% | |
| 8 | AtD Cohort Placing Remdial/Developmental | 41% | 43% | 41% | |
| 9 | Cohort Enrolling Remedial/Developmental | 275 | 330 | 336 | |
| 9a | Percent Cohort Enrolling Remedial/Developmental | 72% | 70% | 73% | |
| 10 | * Increase Percent Enrolling | -1% | -2% | 3% | |
| Efficiency Indicators | Program Year | Efficiency Health Call | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10-11 | 11-12 | 12-13 | |||
| 11 | Average Class Size | 19.3 | 18.5 | 18.4 | Healthy |
| 12 | * Fill Rate | 97.2% | 92.5% | 91.8% | |
| 13 | Number of Low-Enrolled (<10) Classes | 0 | 2 | 0 | |
| 14 | * BOR Appointed Faculty (FTE) | 1.4 | 0.8 | 1.2 | |
| 15 | Non-BOR Appointed Faculty Teaching Classes | 8 | 8 | 7 | |
| 16 | Percentage Classes Taught by Regular Discipline Faculty | 37% | 21% | 36% | |
| 17 | Percentage Classes Taught by non Regular Discipline Faculty | 63% | 79% | 64% | |
| 18 | Program Budget Allocation | $198,850 | $280,612 | $239,335 | |
| 18b | Tution and Fees | $0 | $31,208 | $54,893 | |
| 19 | Cost per SSH | $90 | $133 | $132 | |
| *Data element used in health call calculation | Last Updated: November 13, 2013 |
| Effectiveness Indicators | Program Year | Effectiveness Health Call | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10-11 | 11-12 | 12-13 | |||
| Retention (Course Completion) | Cautionary | ||||
| 20 | 1 Level Below College Level | 96% | 95% | 96% | |
| 21 | 2 Levels Below College Level | 95% | 98% | 99% | |
| 22 | 3 or More Levels Below College Level | 94% | 91% | 100% | |
| Successful completion (Equivalent C or Higher) | |||||
| 23 | 1 Level Below College Level | 64% | 56% | 59% | |
| 23a | 1 Level Below College Level | 387 | 321 | 297 | |
| 24 | Withdrawals (Grade = W) | 26 | 27 | 22 | |
| 25 | 2 Levels Below College Level | 53% | 54% | 63% | |
| 25a | 2 Levels Below College Level | 52 | 47 | 45 | |
| 26 | Withdrawals (Grade = W) | 5 | 2 | 1 | |
| 27 | 3 or More Levels Below College Level | 69% | 41% | 58% | |
| 27a | 3 or More Levels Below College Level | 24 | 18 | 18 | |
| 28 | Withdrawals (Grade = W) | 2 | 4 | 0 | |
| Achieving the Dream | AtD Fall Cohort | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |||
| 29 | Cohort Enrolled in Remedial Developmental Course | 275 | 330 | 336 | |
| 30 | Cohort Successful Completion at Least One Remedial/Developmental Course within First Academic Year | 185 | 230 | 193 | |
| 31 | Percent Cohort Successful Completion | 67% | 10% | 57% | |
| Remedial/Developmental Pipeline | |||||
| 32 | AtD Cohort Size | 927 | 1,101 | 1,102 | |
| 33 | Percent AtD Students Placing Into Remedial/ Developmental Level | 41% | 43% | 41% | |
| 34 | Percent AtD Cohort Enrolled in Remedial/ Developmental Course | 30% | 30% | 30% | |
| 35 | Percent AtD Cohort Successfully Completing Any Remedial/ Developmental Course Within First Academic Year | 49% | 49% | 42% | |
| 36 | Percent AtD Cohort Successfully Completing College Level Course Within First Academic Year | 39% | 39% | 41% | |
| Successful Next Level | Program Year | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10-11 | 11-12 | 12-13 | |||
| Persistence (Fall to Spring) | |||||
| 37 | * Percent From 1 Level Below College Level, To College Level | 21.6% | 15.3% | ||
| 37a | From 1 Level Below College Level, To College level | 44 | 47 | 29 | |
| 38 | Percent From 2 Levels Below College Level, To 1 Level Below | 74% | 84% | ||
| 38a | From 2 Levels Below College Level, To 1 Level Below | 25 | 23 | 31 | |
| 39 | Percent From 3 or More Levels Below College Level, To 2 Levels Below | 46% | 50% | ||
| 39a | From 3 or More Levels Below College Level, To 2 Levels Below | 10 | 6 | 6 | |
| Success in Subsequent Level (Equivalent C or Higher) | |||||
| 40 | College Level From 1 Level Below | 30 | 37 | 21 | |
| 40a | * Percent College Level From 1 Level Below | 78.7% | 72.4% | ||
| 41 | 1 Level Below From 2 Levels Below College Level | 15 | 13 | 15 | |
| 42 | 2 Levels Below From 3 or More Levels Below College Level | 2 | 5 | 2 | |
| *Data element used in health call calculation | Last Updated: November 13, 2013 |
Part II. Analysis of the Program
Overall Health: Healthy
Demand Health: Healthy
Strengths:
Demand for remedial and developmental reading classes remains healthy as evidenced by the following data:
• 535 students enrolled in remedial/development reading courses;
• 1818 (SSH) semester hours taught
• 284 full-time students enrolled in the fall;
Efficiency: Healthy
Strengths:
Efficiency is healthy as evidenced by the following data:
• Average class size of 18.2 out of class capacity of 20 indicates efficiency of class size;
• the fill rate for remedial/developmental reading classes is 91.8 which falls well within the the healthy benchmark set by the UHCC data scoring rubric;
• no low enrolled courses were offered;
• percentage of classes taught by regular discipline faculty increased from 21% to 36%;
• percentage taught by non regular discipline faculty decreased from 79% to 64%; and
• cost per SSH dropped by $1 from the previous year.
Weaknesses:
• Although fill rates remained healthy, 91.8%, they dropped slightly from 92.5%;
• although the percentage of courses taught by regular discipline faculty rose from 21% to 36%, 64% of faculty were taught by non regular faculty;
• program budget allocation dropped from $280,612 to $239,335.
• 198 full-time student enrolled in the fall and 122 in spring; and
• enrollment for the ATD cohort increased by 3%.
Effectiveness: Cautionary
Strengths:
• The retention rate increased for all three levels: from 95-98-91% to 96-99-100% for all three levels;
• the successful completion rate increased for all three levels, from 56-54-41% to 59-63-58%; and
• withdrawals dropped from 4 to 0.
Weakness:
• Persistence levels dropped for one level below college, from 21.6% to 15.3%, but went up for two levels below college level, from 74% to 84%, and three levels below, from 46% to 50%; the drop in persistence levels for one step below college level could be attributed to ENG 21 being the terminal level for many students under the previous AAS degree requirements, which are being phased out;
• success at the subsequent level for one step below college level to college level dropped from 78.7% to 72.4%.
Weaknesses:
Demand for remedial classes remained healthy,
• but enrollment, following a campus-wide trend, in remedial/developmental reading dropped from 638 to 535, while semester hours taught (SSH) dropped from 2109 to 1818; and
• number of classes taught dropped from 38 to 33.
Significant Program Actions for 2012 2013
1. Preliminary agreement to align course numbers, titles, and learning outcomes with other CCs in the system for English 18, 20R, and 21.
2. Piloted an ENG 21-History 151 linked-course project to shorten time to graduation. Allowed students who did not meet prerequiste for History 151 to enroll in both courses.
Previous Program Actions
1. Utilize the program review process to evaluate developmental education enrollment and completion to determine effectiveness; meet once a year as a program.
- Developmental reading are now part of the program review process, even though the courses are not a program, just a series of courses designed to help students reach college-level writing skills. Faculty meet monthly as part of the English Department. Continue to monitor results.
2. Expand financial aid programs and improve remedial/developmental education by securing a portion of the $2 million UH system funds set aside for these purposes.
- Received a $50,000 grant from UHCC system to equip a classroom with 25 laptops and security cart for developmental writing course, but equipment will be available eventually for reading classes.
Part III. Action Plan
Program Action Plan
1. Increase faculty for remedial developmental reading courses.
- The strategic plan calls for funding new positions recommended by CERC but the English Department has seen no additions in this area. As enrollment and need has increased, the department is left to hire more lecturers which puts a strain on available resources.
2. Seek funding for security cart and 25 laptops/tablets for mobile classroom.
- As technology continues to evolve and require additional skills from our students, the English Department seeks to develop ways to engage students and make reading instruction relevant to those students who need to develop basic skills to be successful in other courses, to train for the workforce or to transfer to a four-year institution.
3. Obtain funds to allow one faculty member teaching developmental reading to attend a national level conference.
- Fund staff development by paying for a faculty member teaching developmental reading to attend a national-level reading conference.
Part IV. Resource Implications
Cost Item 1
New faculty position Personnel $55,00
Full-time faculty provide consistency of instruction, work on committees, provide academic advising, participate in professional development, and support department activities.
Cost Item 2
Equip 1 classroom with tablets/laptops and security storage cabinet Equipment $50,000
Continued demands of evolving technology require that writing students engage in learning via the technology that they will be using in academic and commercial work places.
Cost Item 3
Conference Personnel $5,000
In order to innovate, faculty must be aware of new ideas and new methods to improve retention and success rates. Although we have access to technology which allows for distance education, faculty need to be outside their comfortable environment to accept new ways of doing things.