×
×

Notes - Approved

Download PDF
View Agenda
View Attachments

Meeting Notes

Koue Vang
Jeffrey Sacha
Adam Windham
Melissa Fish
Diana Garcia
Sumiah Alharasis
Yujiro Shimizu
Jeffrey Moran
Veronica Lopez
Jeffrey Sacha
Jessica Nelson
Diana Lopez
Joel Keebler
Brenda Valles
Tammi Driver
NAME OF COUNCIL/TEAM: Institutional Effectiveness Council
OBJECTIVE OF MEETING:
DATE OF MEETING: 02/26/2024
TIME: 3:00pm		 LOCATION/ROOM #: https://lrccd.zoom.us/j/83747472700
CALL-IN NUMBER:
CALL-IN CODE:
FACILITATOR(S): BJ Snowden/Jeff Sacha
ASSISTANT:
MEMBERS PRESENT:
INVITED GUEST(S):
SUPPORTING RESOURCES (ITEMS READ IN PREPARATION FOR AND/OR BROUGHT TO MEETING):
Attached Files:
2019 Integrated Planning Guide
Summary of actions taken to address Dept Set Standards
2023-24 Annual Unit Plan Summary
 
UPDATES AND BRIEF REPORTS:
Topic Person(s) Responsible Notes
Welcome BJ Snowden/Jeff Sacha 

				

				

					
Summary of responses to the Institution (Department) Set Standards Reporting form for the '23-'24 Cycle

We will discuss the summary and answer questions from the Council. At the IEC's March meeting, we propose that the Council include an action item to form a list of implications for the institution that can be brought to the Executive Leadership Team for discussion and published on ARC's website. 
					

					Jen Laflam/Yujiro Shimizu
					
o	For Fall, folks respond by November (who fell below student success metrics)
o	Part of ACCJC campus visit/audit recommendation on clarifying the process
o	Two questions on the survey:
	What are the actions you’ll take
	Point out things that may have been happening out of your control
o	Hope: revisit this list at our next meeting and consider the institutional implications (which were not followed up on or followed through on) 
	Read the ISS summary before next meeting and, from that summary, infer what is implied for the institution
	Write a list of implications to be brought forward to leadership
	Desire to track trends 
	Document any action taken in response to the implications


				

				

					
2023-24 Annual Unit Planning Summary Report

The 2023-2024 AUP summary report format has been updated to be more digestible. The new report includes a list of action titles addressing DI at the end of the summary to provide a glimpse of how units at ARC are working to better support students from ARC’s disproportionately impacted populations. Yuj Shimizu prepared the 2023-2024 AUP summary report and offers his main takeaway: 2023-2024 Annual Unit Plans included 430 separate actions across 63 units. These actions were most frequently associated with addressing disproportionate impact (DI), providing an exemplary teaching, learning and working environment, and utilizing innovative and high-quality instructional methods and technologies. Professional development continued to be the most requested resource. A list of action titles addressing disproportionate impact are included at the end of this summary to provide a glimpse of how units at ARC are working (in both broad and similar ways) to better support students from ARC’s disproportionately impacted populations.
					

					Jen Laflam/Yujiro Shimizu
					
o	Want to report out to the College what is happening in folks’ AUP process
o	It can also help us guide future planning cycles (what communication do 
o	Action: are there things people are saying they need?
	What resources do folks need
	Are we acting in accordance with those requests?
o	2017/18 was the first year of the redesign process
	Data was included!
	The Research Office has augmented its training on data for folks
o	Professional development is still the most commonly requested PD
	Far and away
	DI and Department Set Standards were the PD topics associated with this request for PD
o	Big questions: 
	Is the current AUP process working?
	What is our experience with the AUP process?
	How does this Council want to use this information (the AUP summary)?


				

				

					
Student Service Program DI Reports in Data on Demand

A brief presentation of the newly available feature.
					

					Jen Laflam/Yujiro Shimizu
					
o	Student satisfaction with student support data:
	Recognition of a list of student services
	Use of services
	If used, how satisfied are students?
o	Yuj demonstrated the portal in Precision Campus
o	Should HomeBases be included?


				

				

					
Faculty & Classified PD Funding Process
					

					BJ Snowden
					
o	Jen is working to streamline the process
o	Brian and BJ met with Acad Senate committee who oversees the PD process
o	The process has not changed since 2008/2009
o	The cost has changed (increased) and we need to edit the process in light of that


				

				

					
Funding for Equity Conferences
					

					BJ Snowden
					
o	Survey was sent out for “funding for equity conference”
o	Recommendations have been made to Pres cabinet
o	Anticipate lots of support (especially for NCORE)
o	Team of 6 folks are heading to NCORE


				




		

			ACTION ITEMS:
		

		

			Question
			Person(s) Responsible
			Notes and Decision(s)
			Next Steps
			
		


				

					
							  
					
					
					
0    
							
					
					
				

				

					 
					 
					 
					 
				


		

			DISCUSSION ITEMS:
		


		

			Question
			Person(s) Responsible
			Notes and Next Steps
		


				

						ARC Investing in Research for Student Services

The college has made good progress using data to improve student outcomes and engage in equity work with instructional faculty.  The data is accessible, easy to understand, and provides important feedback for faculty as they explore equity practices.  Perhaps IEC can discuss research efforts for Student Services.  

Institutional Retention and Success data is often sited when the college makes changes to Student Services but there is dearth of  relevant information about our specific practices.   The Council could develop some recommendations regarding Student Services data including:

•	Service Use: Who is accessing various SS programs, when, and for what resources?  We can disaggregate that data and look for ways to improve awareness and access for underserved populations and use the information for resource allocation decisions.     

•	Students’ experience: Surveys and focus groups can offer insight into our onboarding process, our counseling services, our communications, and more.  This disaggregated data could be used to target PD or make important decisions about resource allocation.  SS departments currently have satisfaction surveys as part of the AUP process but they do not offer much insight into the student’s experience.  

					Jessica Nelson
					
					
    o	Satisfaction is a great place to start, but not sure it is as instructive about how to address those gaps
	How do we know how to improve the experiences of specific student groups
	Useful “customer service” data but not great psycho-social data
	Gather service use data based on service use, not self-report student use
•	We have students swiping in and out, which creates a digital paper trail we could utilize

							
				

				

					 
					 
					 
				


		

			ITEMS FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION:
		


		

			Topic
			Contact Person
		


				

					NA