1

INSTRUCTIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM REVIEW

COR’s Updated: Fall 2009 & Fall 2010Narrative Document Submitted Fall 2011

COMMUNICATION STUDIESDISCLIPLINE

NORCO 2011

Riverside Community College District Office of Institutional Effectiveness

Web Resources: http://www.rccdfaculty.net/pages/PR_status.htm

2

Table of Contents

A. Mission and Relationship to the College……………………………………..Page 3B. History………………………………………………………….........................Page 4C. Data and Environmental Scan………………………………………………. Page 5D. Programs and Curriculum……………………………………………………Page 8E. Student Outcomes Assessment………………………………………………. Page 9F. Collaboration with Other Units……………………………………………....Page 9G. Outreach………………………………………………………………………. Page 10H. Long Term Major Resource Planning……………………………………......Page 10 I. Summary…………………………………………………………………..….....Page 10J. Recommendations to the Program Review Committee…………………….. Page 11

Course Outlines – See Curricunet

Appendices1) Communication Studies Transfer Model Curriculum ……….....Page 132) Norco Communication Studies Course Rotation………………...Page 153) Data Tables: Norco College Data…………………………………Page 174) Data Tables: District/Norco Communication Studies Data…… Page 195) Assessment Schedule (Fall 2011Update)…………………………Page 21

3

COMMUNICATION STUDIES DISCLIPLINE COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM REVIEW 2011

A. Mission and Relationship to the College(s)

Communication Studies Mission StatementThe Communication Studies Discipline of Norco College prepares students to build connection and influence across personal and professional contexts through the development of communication theory comprehension and skill acquisition.

Relationship to the Mission of the District and the Mission of the College The Communications Studies Discipline is most closely related to the mission of the district (stated in full below the table) and to the mission of the college (also stated in full below the table) in the following areas:

Communications Studies (COM) Relationship to Mission(s)

Quotation fromDistrict Mission

Quotation fromCollege Mission

COM is an educational program of the college that prepares students to build connection and influence across personal and professional contexts through the development of communication theory comprehension and skill acquisition.

…provide educational services to meet the needs and expectations of unique communities of learners.

Norco College provides educational programs…

We equip our students with the knowledge and skills.

COM supports students to meet CTE, general education, and transfer goals;COM is one of two Transfer Model Curriculums at the college.(details in B. History)

…dedicated to the success of our students and to the development of the communities we serve.

…to attain their goals in higher, career/technical, and continuing education; workforce development; and personal enrichment.

COM assesses Student Learning Outcomes in order to improve teaching strategies to promote student success.

…while engaging in self-examination, learning outcomes assessment, ongoing dialogue, planning, and improvement.

4

Norco College Mission: Norco College provides educational programs, services, and learning environments for a diverse community. We equip our students with the knowledge and skills to attain their goals in higher, career/technical, and continuing education; workforce development; and personal enrichment. To meet the evolving community needs Norco College emphasizes the development of technological programs. As a continuing process we listen to our community and respond to its needs while engaging in self-examination, learning outcomes assessment, ongoing dialogue, planning, and improvement.

Riverside Community College District Mission: Riverside Community College District is dedicated to the success of our students and to the development of the communities we serve. To advance this mission, our colleges and learning centers provide educational and student services to meet the needs and expectations of their unique communities of learners. To support this mission, District Offices provide our colleges with central services and leadership in the areas of advocacy, resource development, and planning.

B. History

1. The discipline’s name was changed to Communication Studies (COM) to align with the State Chancellor’s Office name change in the Minimum Qualifications Handbook. The previous name was Speech Communication (SPE).

2. The Communication Studies Transfer Model Curriculum (TMC) was adopted by the district discipline to support student transfer to CSU (and some UC’s) with junior standing in Communication Studies and guarantees of not having to retake lower division course work. (See appendix #1)

3. COM courses were included in five of the seven Areas of Emphasis (AoEs), implemented in 2007. Every COM course now meets a component of RCC General Education, AA and/or AS graduation pattern.

4. All COM courses have been supported by the work of our RCCD articulation officer to transfer to either CSUs or UCs.

5. Public Speaking and Interpersonal Communication are part of Norco College’s Honors Program (UCLA TAP certified) as of 2005, and are designated as COM 1H and COM 9H, accordingly.

6. The discipline has developed a five-year course rotation designed to

5

broaden the range of course offerings (beyond the core courses of

COM 1:Public Speaking and COM 9:Interpersonal Communication). In order to support student access to GE, AoE (Areas of Emphasis), and TMC requirements sections of COM 3: Argumentation & Debate are now offered two times a year, sections of COM 11: Storytelling, COM 12: Intercultural Communication, and COM 13: Gender Communication are offered two terms every two years. Plans are in place to begin regular offerings of COM 2: Persuasion & Rhetorical Perspective, COM 6: Small Group Communication, and COM 7: Oral Interpretation. (See appendix #2)

7. Two full-time COM faculty have joined the discipline: in Fall of 2006 and in Spring 2011.

8. Six adjunct faculty members are no longer teaching COM courses at Norco College due to a combination of section cuts and an increase in full-time coverage. One full-time instructor, was on medical leave Fall 2011 which temporarily made additional COM sections available to COM adjunct faculty.

9. Budget constraints have forced sections cuts in Communication Studies: Summer and Winter sessions are down to one section each (previous terms have had offerings of 8 and 6, respectively.) Fall and Spring semesters have seen a 35% cut in offerings. These changes raise the question: will students be able to secure needed COM classes to accomplish their educational goals (of Communication Studies TMC completion, CTE completion, or transfer) in a timely manner?

C. Data Analysis and Environmental Scan

(The following section is analysis drawn from the data in Appendices #3, #4, and #5.)

Success and retention declined between 2005 and 2006: success dropped 14%, retention dropped 7%. At the same time, there was a 15% increase in enrollment. Although this connection may seem counterintuitive, it does reflect the discipline’s inability to manage such a significant increase in enrollment. Nonetheless, we continued to surpass the success and retention rates for the discipline at the district level. Additionally, success and retention in Communication Studies at Norco College have continued to increase since 2007.

6

Efficiency decreased in 2006, rose steadily through 2009 and took a slight dip in 2010; however, the 2010 rate of 531 is above the high of 2005 of 490. For the most part, FTEF and WSCH mirror the efficiency rate changes. The discipline’s 2010 FTEF is slightly above its previous high in 2005. Even though the college’s WSCH has been increasing steadily since 2005, the discipline continues to experience declines. However, our overall efficiency is persistently higher than the discipline at the district level but always lower than the Norco College level. Thus, while we may be more efficient than the disciplines at the other colleges, we are not matching the efficiency levels at our own college. This likely reflects an increase in the number of sections of higher enrollment classes over the last few years while our discipline’s class size remains constant.

Given this data, we are left with some unsurprising connections between success/retention and efficiency. It seems that it might be reasonable to hypothesize that there might be a tipping point at which success and retention are sacrificed for efficiency’s sake. Regardless, the discipline has been successful at reducing the FTEF to its pre-2006 level. This result has been supported by faculty ability to manage course sections at current enrollment caps and continuing to implement student success strategies. Certainly, the addition of a new full-time faculty member in 2006 contributes to the discipline’s ability to improve success and retention.

A. Summary of changes in Student Success 2005 at 77.7% (persistently higher than district level and higher than

NC level that year of 66.4%) 2006 at 64% (still not as low as district level of 2007 at 61.9%; but

lower than the NC level of 68.1%) 2007-2010 rising steadily to 88.2% (still higher than district-level of

73.1 % and NC level of 66.9%) District-wide, lowest point in success was in 2007 but has been

increasing since. Norco College success high in 2003 at 69.9%, dipped in 2007 to 64.9%

and increased to 2010 at 66.9% but still below 2006 level of 68.1%.

B. Summary of changes in Student Retention 2005 91.2 % (persistently higher than the district level; NC hit a high

in 2001 at 90.1%) 2006 83.7 % (slightly lower than the district low in 2007 of 84.8 %; NC

low of 85.8% in 2009) Attributed to dramatic increase in course enrollments

2005 - 565 2006 - 631

2007 – 2010, rising steadily to 88.2 % but still not at highest level in 2003 at 92.7%

7

Success and retention increased regularly after 2006 even with enrollment continuing to high/increase

C. Summary of changes in Efficiency Efficiency decreased in 2006 to 454, rose steadily through 2009 to

577, took a slight dip in 2010 to 531. Still above the high of 2005 of 490. Always higher than the district level. Always lower than NC level.

District level efficiency rose steadily from 2006 of 440 through 2009 at 567 but decreased in 2010 to 517.

FTEF increased sharply in 2006 to 5.4, declined in 2007 to 4.74 and again in 2009 to 4.4 but held steady in 2010. Still slightly above the high of 2005 4.2.

District level FTEF high in 2008 but decreased sharply in 2009 and decreased again in 2010 (and below the high of 2005). NC FTEF increased in 2006, declined in 2007 and again in 2009 to below 2005 level).

WSCH increased sharply in 2006, declined slightly in 2007 and decreased slightly in 2010.

District level WSCH increased steadily through 2008, held steady in 2009, dropped sharply in 2010. NC WSCH has increased steadily since 2005.

Summary of TrendsGiven data indicating that COM enrollment trends are increasing from a low in 2007 and realizing increases in the areas of success, retention, efficiency and FTEF there appears that the unit is doing well in serving learner populations, however, there appears to be a tipping point where success and retention are sacrificed for efficiency sake although the discipline has been successful at reducing the FTEF to its pre-2006 level. The unit hopes the current attention to critical thinking SLOs in our assessment across sections might support greater success and retention.

Overall Performance AssessmentGiven the COM unit’s focus on its mission of preparing “students to build connection and influence across personal and professional contexts through the development of communication theory comprehension and skill acquisition,” the enrollment trends are one measure of strength in this area. Additional measures are anecdotal evidence of student interest in course work and pursuit of COM as a major upon transfer or the new COM TMC at Norco. There are increasing instances of students who will return to take additional courses after successful completion of one COM course, many times with the same instructor who taught their first course (which is true of both full-time and adjunct instructors). One of the improvements that COM faculty members hope to realize through the assessment process is an increase in dialogue across full-time and adjunct faculty regarding pedagogy enhancements.

8

D. Programs and Curriculum

Communication Studies offers the Transfer Model Curriculum (TMC) program which was adopted by the district discipline to support student transfer to CSUs and some UCs with junior standing in Communication Studies. (See appendix #1) This program serves students as an academic springboard into the field of Communication Studies and fulfills the call AB1440 made to provide Community College students with a transferable, defined path of study.

Recent Additions, deletions, or revisions All COR’s updated Fall 2009 and again in Fall 2010 (COM 1, 1H, 2, 3, 5,

6, 7, 9, 9H, 11, 12, 13, 19, 51) COM 9H and COM 1H were created to support the Honors Program COM 5 (Parliamentary Procedure) was changed from 3 to 1 unit Removed COM 1 as a pre-requisite for COM 2 COM 3A’s name was change to COM 3 COM 10A/B deleted due to not meeting state’s newly developed

standards COM 51, repeatability removed and included in Basic Skills list of course

offerings COM 52 was deleted because it was designed for a specific program and

was found, via assessment, to be too comprehensive for the basic skills population for which it was created

Transfer Model Curriculum approved (see appendix #1) COM 12 approved to be offered online to support student distance

education needs. COM 9 approved to be offered as hybrid to support student distance

education needs.

Transfer articulation1. All Communication Studies (COM) courses have been re-articulated,

after updating, and each is UC and/or CSU transferable. COM courses are integrated into AA, AS, and certificate degree patterns as well as being an optional component of RCCD General Education requirements.

2. In the course of the pending review of RCCD GE requirements, the discipline will recommend that Oral Communication be required rather than optional. Currently, students have the option of taking COM 1, 1H, 9 or 9H to fulfill area D2 of the general education requirements necessary for acquiring an AA or AS degree.

9

Entry Skill ValidationThrough discipline discussion and anecdotal data we have recognized that significant numbers of students who struggle or drop, across the Communication Studies curriculum, are students who are not eligible for English 1A. As such, inherent in our discussion of student learning outcomes have been the questions of how to best serve under-prepared students. We have recognized the need for students to have basic skill sets in reading and writing in order to succeed in courses across the Communication Studies curriculum and therefore hold that eligibility for ENG 1A prepares students to succeed in the Communication Studies curriculum and have adopted the advisory of “Qualification for English 1A” based on the rationale that a student that is capable of college level transferable credits is also capable of college level critical thinking. We have completed the appropriate documentation for this rationale via Curricunet in Fall 2009 and 2010.

E. Student Learning Outcomes Assessment

The unit has no district-wide assessment to report. (However, appendix #6 details the units’ Assessment Schedule.)

F. Collaboration with other units including Instructional, Student Services or Administrative Units (Internal)

Collaboration with other units has occurred in the following ways:

Instructional – Department meetings successfully serve to keep the COM discipline informed regarding the instructional needs of colleagues in English, English as a Second Language (ESL), Journalism, and Reading and prepared to collaborate where appropriate as we have this past Academic Year regarding department discussion and approval of curriculum change requests.

Student Services – In the past, COM faculty successfully met with Counseling to come to a shared understanding of COM course content, degree and transfer requirements which COM courses meet. The meeting opened invaluable channels between COM faculty and Counseling and led to a more accurate understanding of each other’s roles which encouraged improved collaborative support of student course selection and matriculation. Potential Change – It would be helpful to have the groups meet again to renew the relationship (due to personnel changes in both

10

areas) and discuss the implications of the new COM Transfer Model Curriculum.Having a COM faculty member on the Matriculation Advisory Committee for the last eight years has been beneficial in successfully acting as liaison between the two functions.

Administrative – Successful collaboration with this area has been facilitated through shared membership of COM faculty with administration during service as Communications Department Assistant Chair, Communications Department Chair, and the Academic Planning Council, service on various Strategic Planning Committees, Co-chairing of the Resources Strategic Planning Committee, service on the Strategic Planning Co-Chair Council, and the newly created Institutional Strategic Planning Committee, service on the Curriculum Committee, service as a Norco Academic Secretary/Treasurer, and as a Norco Academic Senator representing the Communications Department, service as the Chair of the District Academic Standard Committee, and service on the Norco Legacy Committee. Shared membership with administrators (or attendance by administrators as in the case of the Academic Senate) in these various capacities has been successful means of building and maintaining relationships with administrators while increasing accurate understanding of our respective responsibilities and positions on relevant issues.

G. Outreach Activities (External)

Coordinated activity to support shared district discipline curriculum with Riverside Community College and Moreno Valley College.

H. Long Term Major Resource Planning

N/A

I. Summary

Goals & Objectives1. Maintain a sufficient number of COM offerings to meet student needs.2. Continue to increase sections of those courses infrequently offered

which meet student requirements.

11

3. Create a course rotation that meets that supports two-year matriculation by students under the new Communication Studies Transfer Model Curriculum.

4. Publicize the Communication Studies Transfer Model Curriculum for likely communication majors transferring to CSU, UC and private universities.

5. Strengthen the relationship between full-time and adjunct (associate) Communication Studies faculty.

6. Use assessment as a tool for improving student learning through dialogue amongst full-time and associate discipline members.

7. Add Oral Communication as a general education requirement for AA/AS degree, rather than an option.

8. Develop a new course in Organizational Communication.9. Develop alternative modes of delivery for existing courses (i.e. web-

enhanced, hybrid and online) 10. Consider the use of prerequisites as a tool to support student learning

and success.

Support from the District is needed to help the unit achieve the following goals:

Goal 1: The district and college will need to systematically evaluate the matriculation needs of the student population to ensure that the Communication Studies discipline will be able to offer sufficient courses to support students to accomplish their educational goals in a timely manner. For example, we should have some systematic way of determining how many sections of COM 1 need to be offered each semester to support full-time students to reach their educational goals in two years.

Goals 1-3: Support from department chairs and the Dean of Instruction to offer sufficient breadth of COM courses to support timely matriculation through the Communication Studies Transfer Model Curriculum.

Goal 4: Collaboration with Counseling to get the message to students about the Communication Studies Transfer Model Curriculum.

Goal 5 & 6: Financial remuneration for adjunct faculty to participate in assessment.

Goal 6: The discipline will need the continued support of Arend Flick and Greg Aycock, to move from assessing sections to assessing courses. Their expertise will be needed for individual coaching and consultation to accomplish this goal.

12

J. Recommendations to the Program Committee

1. Open channels through which units can get a clear picture of what is expected and timely feedback during the preparation of the Comprehensive Program Review (CPR) document are invaluable. Jim Thomas has been that channel for this unit. Our recommendation is to clone Jim – or short of that – work with those units who have produced exceptional Comprehensive Program Reviews, and provide them incentive to act as mentors to the next batch of units who are working on their own Comprehensive Program Review.

2. Support administration to become experts in the needs of particular units (especially Deans and VPs of Instruction) so that they might act as allies who remove the obstacles that block units from supporting, and maximizing student success.

13

Appendices Appendix #1: Communication Studies Transfer Model Curriculum

Program Description: The Communication Studies transfer degree, coupled with CSU Breadth or IGETC requirements, provides opportunity for students to transfer to a CSU with junior standing. The degree encourages students to examine and evaluate human communication across and within various contexts for the purpose of increasing competence.

Program Requirements: The Communication Studies major requires a minimum of 6 courses (which must total 18 or 19 units), distributed in the following four areas:

Required Core (6 units):COM-1 (3 units) Public Speaking (1H may substitute) COM-9 (3 units) Interpersonal Communication (9H may substitute)

Category A - Communication Studies Courses (3 units)COM-2 (3 units) PersuasionCOM-3 (3 units) Argumentation & DebateCOM-6 (3 units) Dynamics of Small Group Communication

Category B - Communication Studies Electives (6-7 units) COM-2 (3 units) Persuasion in a Rhetorical Perspective (if not

taken in category A)COM-3 (3 units) Argumentation & Debate (if not taken in category A)COM-5 (1 unit) Parliamentary Procedure COM-6 (3 units) Dynamics of Small Group Communication (if

not taken in category A)COM-7 (3 units) Oral Interpretation of LiteratureCOM-11 (3 units) Storytelling COM-12 (3 units) Intercultural CommunicationCOM-13 (3 units) Gender and CommunicationCOM-19 (3 units) Reader’s Theater

Category C - Other Electives (3-4 units)

14

COM Any transferable COM course not taken as a core or electiveANT-2 Cultural AnthropologyJOU-7 Mass CommunicationsPSY-1 General PsychologySOC-1 Introduction to Sociology

Program Student Learning Outcomes:

Synthesize communication principles and theories to develop communication competence to improve human interaction.

Apply and analyze rhetorical principles for a variety of purposes adapting to audience and context.

Understand the theoretical and practical relationships between and among symbols, culture and gender to competently create, interpret and/or evaluate messages.

Note: Most courses in the program simultaneously meet CSU Breadth and IGETC requirements. In addition, all Communication Studies courses meet one or more RCC General Education Requirements and satisfy unit requirements for Areas of Emphasis (AoE’s).

15

Appendix #2 – Norco Communication Studies Course RotationCommunication Department Course Rotation for COM @ Norco

Term 1H 9H 2 3 5 6 7 11 12 13 19

elective

section

total

com rang

e

persuasion

Arg Parli

Sm Grp

Oral Inter

p

Storytelling

Inter

cultural

gender

R T

Spring ‘09

X X X 3

Fall ‘09 X X X 3

Spring ‘10

X X X 3

Fall ‘10 X X X X X 3

Spring ‘11

X X X X 2

Fall ‘11 X X X X 3

Spring ‘12

X X X X X 5 7

Fall 12 X X X X 4 6

Spring 13 X X X X 4 6

Fall 13 X (x2)

X X 4 5

Spring 14 X (x2)

X X 4 5

Fall 14 X X (x2)

X X X 6 7

Spring 15 X X (x2)

X X X 6 7

Fall 15 X (x2)

X X X 5 6

Spring 16 X (x2)

X X X 5 6

Fall 16 X X (x2)

X X X X 7 8

Spring 17 X X (x2)

X X X 6 7

Fall 17 X X X X 5 6

16

(x2)Spring 18 X

(x2)X X X 5 6

Fall 18 X X (x2)

X X X X 7 8

Spring 19 X X (x2)

X X X 6 5

X = planned but not offeredCategory A for majorHonors – best possible add spots for honors classesCOM-12/COM-13 – possible cuts if necessary

COM-1 Public Speaking and COM-9 Interpersonal Communication are offered on an ongoing basis; the above rotation is for additional COM courses that meet requirements for students seeking a COM major and/or transfer.

COM-3 Argumentation & Debate is now being offered every semester; it meets a critical thinking transfer requirement for CSUs. Goal: 2 sections per semester.

We have tried to arrange the sequencing of courses so that a course is offered in back-to- back semesters to gain the benefit of word-of-mouth momentum among students, and recruitment efforts coordinated between SPE faculty and Counseling.

COM-12 Intercultural Communication and SPE-13 Gender Communication meet the most general education requirements for students and are in a partnered sequence where are offered in an alternating pattern of two semesters on, one semester off.

COM-6 Small Group Communication is scheduled to join this patter in Spring ’10 and should be articulated to meet CSU transfer requirements at that time.

COM-11 Storytelling and COM-7 Oral Interpretation are offered in a back-to-back sequence scheduled to begin in Fall ’09. These courses both meet requirements for Early Childhood Education students and have a broader appeal as well. Students who enjoy one class are natural candidates to recruit for the other. Notice that the sequence reverses itself in Fall ’11.

17

Appendix # 3 Data Tables: Norco College Data

COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM REVIEW DATA SUPPORT- NOR – BASELINE

18

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Enrollments 13,751 15,694 16,399 16,402 17,417 16,989 17,489 19,949 21,094 22,852

Retention 88.5% 90.1% 89.2% 89.3% 88.1% 86.9% 88.0% 86.3% 86.5% 85.8%

Success 65.2% 68.5% 69.4% 69.9% 69.1% 66.4% 68.1% 64.9% 66.9% 66.9%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

NOR Enrollments, Retention and Success Rates, Fall 2000 - 2009

19

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Efficiency 504.81 533.14 597.33 621.05 718.46

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

NOR Efficiencies, Fall Terms 2005 -2009

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

FTEF 143.44 153.05 147.33 147.79 138.58

Discipline WSCH 72409.81 81597.56 88004.49 91784.32 99564.55

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

0

40

80

120

160

200

WSC

H

FTEF

NOR FTEF and WSCH, Fall Terms 2005 -2009

Appendix # 4 Data Tables: Norco College Communication Studies Data

COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM REVIEW DATA SUPPORT- COMMUNICATION STUDIES - NORCO

20

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Enrollments 380 506 580 572 600 565 631 652 709 690 688Retention 92.1% 90.7% 89.3% 92.7% 89.2% 91.2% 83.7% 85.1% 89.7% 87.2% 88.2%Success 79.2% 77.3% 72.9% 79.0% 76.0% 77.7% 64.0% 67.8% 73.9% 74.5% 75.4%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0

75

150

225

300

375

450

525

600

675

750

NOR Communication Studies, Retention and Success Rates, Fall 2000 - 2010

21

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Efficiency 489.84 454.04 502.07 540.48 577.28 531.58

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

NOR Communication Studies Efficiencies, Fall Terms 2005 -2010

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010FTEF 4.20 5.40 4.74 4.80 4.40 4.40Discipline WSCH 2,057.33 2,451.79 2,378.52 2,594.31 2,540.04 2,338.96

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

WSC

H

FTEF

NOR Communication Studies FTEF and WSCH, Fall Terms 2005 -2010

Appendix # 5 – Assessment Schedule (Fall 2011 Update)

Norco CollegeCommunications DisciplineAssessment Timeline

Content Area: critical thinking in reasoning and fallacies

Course Student Learning OutcomeCOM 1 – Public Speaking 1 & 2COM 3 – Argumentation & Debate 2 & 5COM 9 – Interpersonal Communication

5

Date Action10/7/11 Draft of email to entire discipline AMO10/10/11 email sent AMO10/10-15/11 personal follow-up with adjunct by

phone or face-to-faceMark – Stinson, WeberJan – FloerkeAMO – Nafsgar, Rihan

11/3/11 all question submitted by email11/4/11 (or 11/9)

instrument created discipline

12/12-16/11(finals week)

data collected discipline

Winter 2012 data tabulated G. AycockSpring 2012 data discussion and improvement

dialoguediscipline

22