Notes - Approved
Meeting Notes
Neue Leung
Eliza Arata
Edward Hashima
Kristina Casper-Denman
Oranit Limmaneeprasert
Betty Chan
Eric Chun
Gina Barnard
Susan Chou
Lori Beccarelli
Thoeung Montgomery
Roderic Agbunag
Kevin Xiong
Catherine Pohlman
Rina Roy
Narinedat Madramootoo
Nisha Beckhorn
Kay Lo
Jessie Fuapau
| NAME OF COUNCIL/TEAM: Disproportionate Impact: API (2020-2021) | |||
| OBJECTIVE OF MEETING: Review API Demographic Data and Survey Results | |||
| DATE OF MEETING: 11/18/2020 TIME: 10:00am |
LOCATION/ROOM #: Zoom CALL-IN NUMBER:1-669-900-6833 CALL-IN CODE: Meeting ID: 991 8480 9597; Password: 846096 |
||
| FACILITATOR(S): Raquel Arata & Neue Leung | |||
| ASSISTANT: Catherine Pohlman | |||
| MEMBERS PRESENT: | |||
| INVITED GUEST(S): Cheri Jones | |||
| SUPPORTING RESOURCES (ITEMS READ IN PREPARATION FOR AND/OR BROUGHT TO MEETING): | |||
|
Attached Files:
API Student Demographic Data Fall 20 API Student Survey Results |
|||
| UPDATES AND BRIEF REPORTS: | |||
| Topic | Person(s) Responsible | Notes | |
| Welcome and brief recap of project status | Raquel Arata | Review student demographic data from Data On Demand Review survey results (received yesterday) Recap of previous meetings and work so far Reviewed general lens of equity Insights into serving API students Learned about PRISE and Full Circle Project at Sac State Spoke about conceptual frameworks - lens that we will look at our study Spoke about structure of report - what has to go in it, timelines, etc. Yesterday Raquel and Neue provided update to Student Success Council on progress - believe we will be on time for final deadline (to have a report to share end of February) but they understand that we will not have a rough draft by January due to wanting to collect survey results from students and potential need to organize and implement focus groups One more meeting after this due to Thanksgiving break and then Finals Week At next meeting, need to determine when to reconvene as a group in Spring Request from member- this meeting has conflicted w/ her class schedule, so she is hoping we can record this meeting so she can be engaged in this meeting about the data Group agreed to record Only making it available to team members |
|
| ACTION ITEMS: | |||
| Question | Person(s) Responsible | Notes and Decision(s) | Next Steps |
|
0 |
|||
| DISCUSSION ITEMS: | |||
| Question | Person(s) Responsible | Notes and Next Steps | |
| Demographic Data: What do the API Student Demographic data show, and what insights or ideas may be gleaned about the needs, experience, barriers, and motivators of our API students from this data? What, if any, additional areas warrant further exploration? | All |
On the Data on Demand system, the only API groups that can be searched for are Asian, Filipino, and Pacific Islander. Did not include Multi-Race category because it can include other races. Using these 3 categories, we can get a general impression and then we can ask Research Office for more assistance/information Chris Olsen suggested we look at 3 year span of data (we are using 2017-2019) ARC is close to 5,300 API students in actuality but the demographic data from On Demand shows 3,952 so we know we are missing some students Bulk of students 21-24 years old 63% either low or below poverty level Almost 80% list English as their primary language The biggest group of students who do not list English as their primary language list Farsi = 8%. The rest are around 2% or below Enrollment status - majority are continuing students Headcount has shown a steady increase Educational Goal - largest % is Transfer to 4-year after AA/AS (53%) then earning an AA/AS degree - no transfer and Transfer to 4-year no AA/AS, not many coming to us from the workforce for upskilling or just exploring 47% are at 0-14.99 units completed so seemingly majority are early on in their programs or it could mean they are taking more time to complete their units (working/have families) - need to ask Research to clarify this Oranit brought up that there may be a reduction in the Chinese population due to immigration policies - maybe could be included in our “History” section Largest amount of students (28%) are not in Homebase or are not categorized - need to get clarification on this Next largest in STEM - 27% Programs and Services used seems low Lots of discussion about why that is and how it can be improved Maybe students aren’t aware or aren’t qualified If they aren’t aware, how do we increase awareness? Could faculty increase promotion? Neue said we can incorporate this into our recommendations section of our report |
|
| Student Survey Results: What do the survey results show, and what insights or ideas may be gleaned about the needs, experience, barriers, and motivators of our API students from this data? What, if any, additional areas warrant further exploration? | All |
About 400 students responded = about 8% 1st impressions of the data: Usually in surveys, we should look for patterns and categorize the feedback so we can have a meaningful look especially at the qualitative parts When students are happy they don’t usually express their satisfaction. For those who do express negative feedback, we should look at the context and not necessarily take things at face value Member said maybe we could hone in on the DI groups first Examples: Laotian, Pacific Islander - Guamanian, Samoan, Hawaiian Neue will be asking Yuj to create analyses of these results He will put them in tables and charts in an understandable way HOMEWORK: Take a look at these survey results and bring to the meeting thoughts and observations |
|
| ITEMS FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION: | |||
| Topic | Contact Person | ||
| NA | |||