Department Annual Report & Discipline Review. Automotive Department

Department Annual Report & Discipline Review 2012-2013 Automotive Department Automotive Servicing, Cert Automotive Technology, AAAS Document Prepared By: Professor Chad Lodenstein, Department Head 1

Department Information Documentation Current year goals Revise TR160, TR210, and TR230 courses to align the content of the courses with NATEF standards. Obtain recertification of the program from NATEF. (Obtain required twenty technical-training hours and submit recertification documents) Develop a new Advanced Chassis Systems course. Implement NA3SA skills assessment. Goals for next year Incorporate Snap-on Diagnostics certification program into curriculum of TR160 course. Develop on-line version of TR147 and internship courses for Automotive Technology students, as alternatives to the TR180 and TR280 Applied Servicing courses. Offer student advising sessions for incoming Automotive Technology students. Internal collaborations and partnerships None External collaborations and partnerships Collaboration with Snap-on, Inc. to offer Diagnostics Certification program. Departmental needs for support from other departments within the college None Program accreditation updates The program completed the application process and on-site evaluation for re-accreditation with the National Automotive Technician Education Foundation (NATEF). Results are expected in May or June. Description of departmental advising plan and outcomes Two scheduled advising sessions were held, with one taking place in October and the other in March. Students attending these sessions received input on course planning and credit transfer to FSU. Additionally, students took advantage of drop-in advising sessions with the Department Head. Departmental professional development activities Topics covered in department professional development: 2

1. Hybrid-vehicle technology. Summary of 40 hours of training attended by Randy Lee a. Scan tool operations, such as disabling brake system for service of brake components b. Pressure bleeding methods c. Examination of start/stop systems d. Planetary gear teaching methods e. A/C compressor differences and the use of rear A/C to cool batteries 2. Use of IPads in the classroom teaching a. Keynote b. Notes c. Camera d. YouTube e. AppleTV 3. NATEF Policies and Procedures a. NATEF Training Hours b. Task record keeping c. Re-certification 4. Curriculum a. Proposed changes to certificate & degree b. Significant changes to credit/contacts and course sequence c. CARPs 5. Collaboration with other schools a. KCTC - TR240 during day next fall - Waiting for details from them b. Ottawa Tech Center c. Montcalm CC d. Discussed need to make effort to attend recruiting days 6. Equipment Training a. Verus b. VCI Other department updates - Evaluation Questions 1. Were the department goals for this year successfully met? Please explain. Yes, all four goals were either met completely, or are in the process of being implemented. Course updates, NATEF re-certification, and the development of the Chassis Systems course have been completed. The NA3SA (now ASE Student Certification) is scheduled to take place in May. 2. Is the Advising Plan working well? What have the outcomes been for student advising? 3

Student advising for existing students has been effective. These students are able to get one-on-one advising with instructors and the Department Head on a regular basis. However, advising for incoming students has not been effective. A number of students enter the program each fall with course schedules that are not in line with the program s sequencing. In an effort to improve advising for incoming students, the department is planning to offer new-student advising sessions. The sessions are planned for May and July. Students attending these sessions will receive guidance on course sequencing and a brief orientation session. Action Needed Based on the documentation and evaluation in this section, please indicate if action or improvement is needed in the following areas within the department by making your response bold: External Collaborations & Partnerships Yes No Internal Collaborations & Partnerships Yes No Accreditation Yes No Departmental Advising Yes No Faculty & Staff Documentation Faculty Credentials & Certifications- See Appendix A Professional Development Activities The faculty members in the department attended over 20 hours of professional development, including attendance of: Automatic Transmission Rebuilding Association (ATRA) Powertrain Expo Auto Video, Inc. (AVI) Conference Automotive Aftermarket Products Expo (AAPE) Auto Value/Bumper to Bumper Tech Expo These professional development activities impacted Perkins CORE Indicators 1: Technical Skills Attainment and 2: Credential, Certificate, or Degree. Highlights include: 1. Wire diagram teaching strategies: In one of the sessions, the instructor presented an approach to teaching electronics wire diagrams that involves color-coding wire diagrams. Using this approach, students use highlighters or crayons to define the purpose of each circuit on a wire diagram. Wire diagram analysis is needed in every area of automotive technology. The approach learned at this seminar will primarily be incorporated into TR110 Auto Electricity & Electronics and TR220 Electronic Controls, but it can be used to improve student understanding of wire diagrams in all courses. 4

2. Advanced-Technology Vehicles: This was an informational session which covered electrified and alternative-fuel vehicles. The differences between Hybrid and Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV) were examined, including the Toyota Prius, Chevrolet Volt, and Nissan Leaf. The information shared in this session is not readily available in most textbooks. The information will be incorporated into TR260 Advanced Powertrains as the course is revised to include hybrid vehicle training. Students will learn the differences between these vehicles and some of the safety protocols for each type. 3. Electrical Building Blocks: The instructor in this session presented an approach to analyzing starting and charging systems. A case study was presented, in which an alternative approach to measuring the voltage drop on a battery cable was described. This approach will be presented to students in TR110 Automotive Electricity and Electronics. 4. Blending Learning Strategies: This was an interactive session that explored strategies for assessing student learning. Team-based learning was discussed through the use of a case study on a failure in a diesel engine. The same case study can be used in TR230 Auto Fuel Systems. The team-based learning approach presented in this session has been shared with all four of the Automotive Technology instructors and will be considered as an alternative approach for lab and classroom learning at GRCC EOL/Release Time Work Through EOL/Release time, the following work was accomplished this year: NATEF re-certification for continued accreditation (C. Lodenstein) The program is participating in a project involving articulation between automotive programs in the state of Michigan. (B. Smith and C. Lodenstein) Faculty & Staff Accomplishments/Awards Chad Lodenstein maintained his ASE Master Technician and Advanced Level Specialist status by passing recertification tests: A4R Suspension & Steering, A5R Brakes, A6R Electrical/Electronic Systems, and L1R Automobile Advanced Engine Performance. Faculty Development for Upcoming Year In order to maintain NATEF certification, each faculty member, including adjuncts, must attend 20 hours of technical training every year. Appropriate conferences will be applied for in this year s Perkins request. Evaluation Questions 1. Can course assignments be made and scheduled based on the availability of credentialed faculty? Yes, the program s faculty are teaching near-maximum course loads, in order to cover the schedule. 5

2. Is the number of departmental faculty that are certified to teach online and through Academic Service Learning sufficient to achieve the curricular and delivery needs of the department? Yes, two faculty members are certified, even though no online courses have been developed at this time. 3. Do the number and ratio of Full-time/Adjunct faculty support the goals of the department? Yes 4. Is the professional development faculty and staff are receiving sufficient for them to maintain currency in their field and area(s) of expertise? Yes 5. Are additional faculty or faculty development resources needed to support the goals of the department over the next four years? Yes, if the Job Training program were to be eliminated so that the Automotive Technology program can offer certificates of completion for specific areas of automotive repair, as recently approved by the AGC, then one additional daytime instructor would be needed. Action Needed Based on the documentation and evaluation in this section, please indicate if action or improvement is needed in the following areas within the department by making your response bold: Faculty credentialing Yes No Faculty online certification Yes No Academic Service Learning Yes No Ratio Fulltime/Adjunct faculty Yes No Faculty professional development Yes No Resources Yes No Automotive Technology, AAAS Documentation Mission & Purpose Mission/Purpose Statement The mission of the Automotive Technology Program is to prepare students for entry-level positions and for advancement in the automotive service industry. Students receive training in all areas of automotive service, through both classroom learning and extensive hands-on training. Course offerings also provide members of the community with opportunities for personal enrichment. The program is certified by the National Automotive Technician Education Foundation (NATEF). In addition to earning an Associate Degree, students can obtain Michigan Master Mechanic 6

certification upon completion of the program. Graduates of the program have opportunities to transfer into four-year institutions. Target Audiences The target audience includes any individual seeking training in the field of automotive service. The current student demographics include recent high school graduates, military veterans, and individuals seeking to be retrained for a different occupation. Program Admissions Requirements The program s admission requirements do not differ from the college s general requirements. Evaluation Questions 1. Is the purpose/mission statement current and relevant? Yes 2. Has the target audience for the program been identified? Who is the target audience for this program? Is the program attracting and appropriately serving the target audience? Yes, enrollment is very good, with a diverse group of students. Chad Lodenstein and Ben Smith are building and maintaining relationships with area technical centers through participation in advisory committees to ensure that their students are informed of opportunities at GRCC. 3. If there are admissions criteria for the program, are they appropriate and do they facilitate program and student success? None Action Needed Based on the documentation and evaluation in this section, please indicate if action or improvement is needed in the following areas within the department by making your response bold: Mission/Purpose Yes No Target Audience Yes No Program Admissions Yes No Program Data Documentation New Student Enrollment The data for New Student Enrollment can be found in Appendix B. 7

New-student enrollment in the Automotive Technology AAAS (922) program has fluctuated more significantly over the last four years, but it was relatively constant for 2011 and 2012. Enrollment for 2012 was 45% higher than that of 2009. Total Student Enrollment The data for Total Student Enrollment can be found in Appendix B. Total enrollment in the Automotive Technology AAAS (922) program increased by 29% from 2009 to 2012. Enrollment in 2011 and 2012 was nearly equal, with 207 and 208 students enrolled, respectively. Student Progress The data for Student Progress can be found in Appendix C. Student progress in the Automotive Technology (922) program, in terms of students who graduated, transferred, or are still in the program has been in the 50-60% range over the past four years. The percentage of students who graduated ranged from 4 to 6, but retention and progress data falls into what IRP calls the common range. Retention is good, but the completion rate needs improvement. Student Participation in Nontraditional Fields The data for Student Participation in Nontraditional Fields can be found in Appendix D. In the Student Participation in Nontraditional Fields category, the Automotive Technology programs have ranged from 2.12% to 8.30%, with significant increases over the past two years. Credential, Certificate, or Degree Attainment The data for Credential, Certificate, or Degree Attainment can be found in Appendix D. The percentage of students who earned a credential, certificate, or degree ranged from 17.65% to 27.66%. There is no consistent trend in the data, as the percentage decreased from 2009 to 2010, increased 2010 to 2011, and then decreased in 2012. Student Completion in Nontraditional Fields The data for Student Completion in Nontraditional Fields can be found in Appendix D. With a small number of Nontraditional students, completion percentages fluctuate significantly when a few students graduate. The data shows completions by Nontraditional students in 2009 8

and 2012, but none in 2010 or 2011. Participation is low, but completion rates on nontraditional students exceed the rates of the program. Student Placement The data for Student Placement can be found in Appendix D. Student placement data in Appendix D shows fluctuations from about 8% up to 100%. The Department Head s Data conflicts with Appendix D. Based on direct contact with the graduates, 87% either obtained employment in the field or transferred to a four-year institution. Also, student placement of 7.69% in 2009 and 100% in 2011 indicates questionable reliability in the data. Student Retention and Transfer The data for Student Retention and Transfer can be found in Appendix D. Student Retention and Transfer has averaged 65%, which is 10% higher than the national mean percentage of all two-year public institutions. (Source: ACT Institutional Data File, 2012) Technical Skills Attainment The data for Technical Skills Attainment can be found in Appendix D. This data is not available Course enrollment by semester The data for Course Enrollment by Semester can be found in Appendix E. Enrollment in most courses has been over 90% of the capacity, with a few courses averaging in the mid-80% range. In courses that show slightly lower enrollment data, the sections that are low are typically those offered in the evening. Course Success Rates (broken down by race/ethnicity, gender, age) The data for Course Success Rates can be found in Appendix F. Course success rates vary from course to course and by race/ethnicity, gender, and age. In scanning the data, there is no obvious trend, based on demographics. Four-Year Course Success Trends The data for Four-Year Course Success Trends can be found in Appendix G 9

The course with the lowest success rate and the highest withdraw rate in 2011 was TR220. In an effort to improve success in this course, a co-requisite is being considered. TR143 and TR148 have relatively high withdraw rates and low success rates. Evaluation Questions 1. Is the program consistently attracting new students? Yes, based on the data. 2. Is the enrollment trend meeting established targets, ensuring program viability? If targets for enrollment have not been established, what should they be? Yes, enrollment data shows program viability. Strategic scheduling of courses should help improve enrollment and retention. 3. Do students appear to be progressing through the program well? Yes, student progression and retention data are positive, but the program has a low completion rate. The impact of the following changes should be measured in future years: a. Changes in course sequencing b. Auto Tech student advising sessions 4. To what extent are the targets for core program indicators (Student Participation in Nontraditional fields, Student Retention & Transfer, Credential, Certificate, Degree Attainment, Student Completion in non-traditional fields, Student Placement, Technical Skills Attainment) being met? Are the various sub-populations meeting the targets at the same rate? Yes, see Appendix D. 5. Is the yearly ratio of the number of students enrolled to the number of graduates appropriate given program goals? No. Graduation rates are very low. 6. Are students obtaining employment upon graduation at satisfactory rates? Yes, students are securing employment at a very high rate. In fact, a significant percentage of students who do not complete the programs (921 or 922) secure employment. 7. What does the course enrollment by semester data tell you? Enrollment data from the fall to winter semesters has averaged a decline of 8% from 2009 through 2012, which is a small number of students. 8. Are students passing courses at the appropriate rates? If not, which courses are of concern? No, The TR220, TR148, and TR143 courses should be examined by the appropriate faculty member to determine the reasons behind low passing rates. Are the Course Success Rates the same for the various sub-group populations? No, but there is no consistency. In one course, students over 25 failed at high rates, but the same group performed well in another course. If not, where are the areas of concern? 9. Do the grade distributions seem appropriate for each course? If not, which courses are of concern? No, some courses (TR147, TR143, TR220) show trends of lower grades. 10

Action Needed Based on the documentation and evaluation in this section, please indicate if action or improvement is needed in the following areas within the department by making your response bold: New Student Enrollment Yes No Total Student Enrollment Yes No Student Progress Yes No Student Participation in Nontraditional Fields Yes No Credential, Certificate, or Degree Attainment Yes No Student Completion in Nontraditional Fields Yes No Student Placement Yes No Student Retention and Transfer Yes No Technical Skills Attainment Yes No Course enrollment by semester Yes No Course Success Rates Yes No Course grade distributions Yes No Documentation Curriculum Program Curriculum History (last eight years) The program s curriculum is primarily based on NATEF standards. Additions and changes include: Addition of hybrid-vehicle training in TR210 Automotive Ignition Systems. Incorporation of Electronically-Controlled transmissions in TR240 Automatic Transmissions. TR140 and TR240 were moved from the first year of the associate degree program (922) to the second year. Additionally, these courses were removed from the certificate program (921). TR245 Automotive Chassis Systems has been approved, and it will be offered on the 2013-2014 schedule. Advisory Board Contributions The Advisory Board was consulted regarding both the restructuring of the certificate (921) program, the development of TR245 Automotive Chassis Systems, and the collaboration with Snap-on to offer Diagnostic Certification. Members of the Board also participated in the NATEF Self-Evaluation, as part of the re-certification process. Courses Approved for Online Delivery- See Appendix E 11

TR147 Automotive Brake Systems has been approved for online delivery, but development has not occurred. Honors Courses- See Appendix E None Study Away Courses- See Appendix E None Course Equivalencies with Transfer Institutions- See Transfer Institution Spreadsheet FSU GRCC FSU Course Title Course Major Courses for AAS AAS in Automotive AAS Degree courses in the major and related technical areas. Degree Technology ENGL 150 EN 100 or EN 101 Communications Competence: English I ENGL 250 or EN 102 or Technical & Career Writing ENGL 211 BA 102 or BU 102 MATH 110 MA 104 Quantitative Skills: Gen. Ed. Elective *1 Scientific Understanding: Complete one lab science course from the following subject areas: Biology, Chemistry, Geography, Physics, Physical Science, etc. Gen. Ed. Elective *2 Cultural Enrichment: Complete one course from the following subject areas: Art, History, Humanities, Literature, Music, Foreign Language, etc. Gen. Ed. Elective *3 Social Awareness: Complete one course from the following subject areas: Anthropology, Economics, Political Science, Psychology, Sociology, etc. MATH 115 MA 107 MATH 115 Program/Course Equivalencies with K-12 Institutions TR102 Basic Vehicle Performance TR103 Automotive Engine Design and Servicing TR147 Automotive Brake Systems TR148 Automotive Steering and Suspension TR110 Automotive Electricity and Electronics Evaluation Questions 1. Is the program structured appropriately given the target student population and current student population (traditional, transfer, and/or adult learners)? Yes, based on the data, the program offers the opportunities for success to a diverse student population. 2. To what extent is the program curriculum aligned with external professional standards (Industry, State, or National)? Are the current courses within the program or discipline appropriately and sufficiently addressing external standards? Please explain. Yes and 12

yes. As part of the re-certification process, the program was examined and it was determined that additional coverage was needed in the areas of Brakes, Suspension & Steering, and Electronics. As a result, TR245 Automotive Chassis Systems was developed. 3. Does the program design and structure reflect external standards and best practices? Please explain. Yes, the program meets NATEF standards. 4. To what extent is the curriculum aligned with the first two years of transfer institutions? [Transfer Institution Curriculum Comparison] The curriculum is accepted by Ferris State University as a 2+2 transfer for their Automotive Management Program. Many students are interested in Ferris Automotive Engineering Technology program, and a formal plan is needed. 5. To what extent is the curriculum aligned with the coursework at K-12 institutions? The curriculum has been aligned with area skill centers that are NATEF certified. Due to significant changes in the NATEF standards for secondary programs, further examination is needed to determine if articulation should continue. 6. Do the program outcomes reflect the demonstrable skills, knowledge, and attitudes expected of students by the end of the program? Are the Program Student Learning outcomes clearly stated and measurable? If not, what changes are suggested? Yes, NATEF standards meet all of these criteria. 7. Are all four of the ILOs and associated competencies integrated into the program? Do students have the opportunity to build the knowledge, skills, and attitudes associated with the ILOs throughout the program? Yes. Through a combination of automotive curriculum and general education courses, all of the ILOs are covered in the program. Yes. The programs technical courses, along with the required general education courses incorporate all of the ILOs. 8. Are the current course offerings sufficient in terms of breadth and depth? If not, what courses should be added and or eliminated? Yes, with the addition of TR245 to the schedule, the program meets NATEF standards. 9. Have general education courses been purposefully integrated into the program? Are the general education courses within the program appropriate and sufficient to support the learning associated with the Institutional and Program Learning Outcomes? Yes, the current combination of technical and general education courses are intended to meet both the program s and the college s learning outcomes. The assessment project is intended to help measure communication skills related to the occupation, so more information and data will be available after the assessment is completed and analyzed. 10. Are the Honors and Study Away offering sufficient for the program? Not applicable 11. Do the course sequences require increasing application of higher-order thinking skills as students progress through the program? Yes, the course sequencing allows students to 13

build on previous courses. Is the course sequence aligned in such a way that the Program Student Learning outcomes are mastered by the end of the program? Yes, all of the areas of automotive repair are covered, and students can master the NATEF learning outcomes through completion of the program. 12. Is experiential learning, including internships and academic service learning, systematically embedded into the courses? Experiential learning is incorporated into every automotive course, but internships and academic service learning are not. Are the current experiential learning opportunities sufficient? Please explain. No, there is a need for structured internships in the program. 13. Does the curriculum prepare students for a constantly changing employment environment, and prepare students to expect and manage change? Please explain. Yes, students in the program learn about existing technology and diagnostic approaches for future developments in technology. 14. Is the curriculum developed in such a way that it allows students to continue their education once they are finished with this program? Please explain. Yes, students have the opportunity to transfer credits to four-year institutions. Students are also prepared to participate in advanced training offered either by manufacturers or in the automotive aftermarket industry. 15. Are the online offerings (courses & number of sections) sufficient to meet student and programmatic needs? Student and programmatic needs for online offerings have not been measured. Action Needed Based on the documentation and evaluation in this section, please indicate if action or improvement is needed in the following areas within the department by making your response bold: Program structure Yes No Curriculum alignment with external professional standards Yes No Transfer alignment Yes No Curriculum Alignment K-12 Yes No Program Outcomes Yes No Program Learning Outcomes Yes No Course offerings Yes No General Education Yes No Honors Program Yes No Study Away Program Yes No Internship Yes No Academic Service Learning Yes No Course sequencing Yes No 14

Pre-requisites Yes No Preparing students for change Yes No Online Offerings (courses & programs) Yes No Assessment of Student Learning Documentation Please answer the questions below for each assessment project that you are working on this year. If you have more than one project, simply cut and paste the headers for each section below, in order to create a report for each. Program Learning Outcome(s) assessed this year The assessment of learning outcomes for this program are planned for the summer semester. Measures of Student Learning [Please list the measures of student learning that were used this year (student work/measurement instrument] Initial Data and Findings [Summarize the data and findings from the measurement of student learning. Add the detailed data to the appendices] Curricular or Pedagogical Changes Implemented [Briefly describe the curricular or pedagogical changes are planned or were made as a result of what you learned from the measurement of Program Learning Outcomes.] Data and Findings (post improvement/change) [Summarize the data and findings from the measurement of student learning after the improvements/changes were made. Add the detailed data to the appendices] Evaluation 1. Are licensure/certification exam pass rates are above national or state averages (if applicable)? If not, please explain what needs to be done to improve. 2. What are your greatest needs for support in order to continue to move forward with your assessment work? Action Needed Based on the documentation and evaluation in this section, please indicate if action or improvement is needed in the following areas within the department by making your response bold: 15

Identifying Measures for each Program Learning Outcome Yes No Reporting out longitudinal data in a meaningful format Yes No Creating meaningful improvement projects Yes No Documentation Preparing for the future Job and Wage Forecasts- See Appendix I Job growth is predicted to slow over the next ten years, but the number of regional openings far exceeds the number of potential completions. Environmental Scanning/Trends An Environmental Scanning Report was conducted by GRCC s Institutional Research and Planning department in October, 2012. The research indicated that Michigan ranks 10 th in the nation in the number of job openings for mechanics. On a regional, three-county-area, level, the data in this report shows a 7% increase in mechanic jobs over the last three years. In the past year, over 170 related job openings have been posted on internet sites. Forecasting data predicts over 80 annual openings for auto mechanics in the Grand Rapids area over the next 10 years. This data is supported by the job the placement surveys of graduates in 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 school years. PROE Student Survey Results- See supplemental data file Only one student completed the survey. Advisory Board Survey Results- See Document 1. Most of the responses were excellent. A few responses from the Advisory Board members shows that a few members did not know how well the about the program s performance related to: Demonstrates that students are prepared for entry-level employment Data is collected on job success and failures of former students. Will you take any actions with the program as a result of what you have learned? The addition of automotive technology internship courses should help to gather this type of data. The data can be shared with the Advisory Board and it could be used to develop benchmarks for improvement. Program Planning 16

Over the next four years, the program plans to: Develop and offer internship courses Develop and offer on-line course(s) Become a Snap-on Diagnostic Certification Training Center Improve student advising Start a student organization to increase student involvement Evaluation Questions 1. Do the job projections and wages data suggest that this program will be viable over the next four years? Yes 2. Is the number of graduates aligned with the market need (job forecasts/transfer institutions)? Yes 3. What did you learn from the PROE Student Survey results? Will you take any actions with the program as a result of what you have learned? 4. What did you learn from the Advisory Board Survey results? The responses from the Advisory Board members shows that a few members did not know how well the about the program s performance related to: Demonstrates that students are prepared for entry-level employment Data is collected on job success and failures of former students. Will you take any actions with the program as a result of what you have learned? The addition of automotive technology internship courses should help to gather this type of data. The data can be shared with the Advisory Board and it could be used to develop benchmarks for improvement. 5. Are the resources sufficient to meet identified needs and goals for the next four years? Please explain. Yes, with the exception of the need for additional Snap-on diagnostic equipment. The program needs three Verus diagnostic systems to receive approval to deliver the Diagnostic Certification program. 6. Are the facilities and equipment adequate to facilitate teaching and learning? Please explain. Yes, lab and classroom space are being fully utilized. The program s equipment is state-of-the-art. Action Needed Based on the documentation and evaluation in this section, please indicate if action or improvement is needed in the following areas within the department by making your response bold: Program Planning Yes No Securing resources for course development/administration Yes No 17

Facilities/equipment upgrades Yes No Other: Yes No Other: Yes No Other: Yes No Other: Yes No Additional Tasks/Work Develop the Course Review schedule for the next four years (beginning with next year) o 2013-2014 TR160 TR260 TR102 TR143 o 2014-2015 TR180 TR280 TR140 TR240 o 2015-2016 TR210 TR230 TR110 TR220 o 2016-2017 TR147 TR148 TR245 Identify which courses from the department will be developed in online or hybrid format over the next four years. Indicate the highest priorities for online and hybrid development and the academic year in which the course will be developed. o Listed in highest-to-lowest priority TR147 TR102 Review all publications, website, catalog to ensure consistency of information Complete the Follow-Up Action Checklist 18

Automotive Servicing, Certificate Documentation Mission & Purpose Mission/Purpose Statement The mission of the Automotive Technology Program is to prepare students for entry-level positions and for advancement in the automotive service industry. Students receive training in all areas of automotive service, through both classroom learning and extensive hands-on training. Course offerings also provide members of the community with opportunities for personal enrichment. The program is certified by the National Automotive Technician Education Foundation (NATEF). In addition to earning an Associate Degree, students can obtain several Michigan Mechanic certifications upon completion of the program. Target Audiences The target audience includes any individual seeking training in the field of automotive service. The current student demographics include recent high school graduates, military veterans, and individuals seeking to be retrained for a different occupation. Program Admissions Requirements The program s admission requirements do not differ from the college s general requirements. Evaluation Questions 1. Is the purpose/mission statement current and relevant? Yes 2. Has the target audience for the program been identified? Who is the target audience for this program? Is the program attracting and appropriately serving the target audience? Yes, enrollment is very good, with a diverse group of students. Chad Lodenstein and Ben Smith are building relationships with area technical centers through participation in advisory committees. 3. If there are admissions criteria for the program, are they appropriate and do they facilitate program and student success? None Action Needed Based on the documentation and evaluation in this section, please indicate if action or improvement is needed in the following areas within the department by making your response bold: 19

Mission/Purpose Yes No Target Audience Yes No Program Admissions Yes No New Student Enrollment Program Data The data for New Student Enrollment can be found in Appendix B. Enrollment of new students in the Automotive Servicing Certificate (921) program has been constant over the past four years, ranging from 19 to 22 students. Total Student Enrollment The data for Total Student Enrollment can be found in Appendix B. The total number of students in the Automotive Servicing Certificate (921) program fluctuated significantly over the past four years, with a low of 43 and a high of 67. Overall, the number decreased by 8% from 2009 to 2012. This percentage amounts to a decrease of seven students. Student Progress The data for Student Progress can be found in Appendix C. The 921 Certificate program is designed to be completed in one year, yet 30-40% of the students have returned over the past four years. Student Participation in Nontraditional Fields The data for Student Participation in Nontraditional Fields can be found in Appendix D. With a small number of Nontraditional students, completion percentages fluctuate significantly when a few students graduate. The data shows completions by Nontraditional students in 2009 and 2012, but none in 2010 or 2011 Credential, Certificate, or Degree Attainment The data for Credential, Certificate, or Degree Attainment can be found in Appendix D. The percentage of students who earned a certificate in the 921 program increased from 3% to 6% from 2009 to 2012. While this is an improvement, it is still very low. Student Completion in Nontraditional Fields 20

The data for Student Completion in Nontraditional Fields can be found in Appendix D. With a small number of Nontraditional students, completion percentages fluctuate significantly when a few students graduate. The data shows completions by Nontraditional students in 2009 and 2012, but none in 2010 or 2011. Participation is low, but completion rates on nontraditional students exceed the rates of the program. Student Placement The data for Student Placement can be found in Appendix D. Student placement data in Appendix D shows fluctuations from about 8% up to 100%. The Department Head s Data conflicts with Appendix D. Based on direct contact with the students who earned a certificate, 100% obtained employment in the field. Student Retention and Transfer The data for Student Retention and Transfer can be found in Appendix D. Because this is a one-year program, retention and transfer are not desired. A retention rate of 30-40% may be due to a large number of part-time students in the program, or it may show a need for better advising. Technical Skills Attainment The data for Technical Skills Attainment can be found in Appendix D. This data is not available Course enrollment by semester The data for Course Enrollment by Semester can be found in Appendix B. Enrollment in most courses has been over 90% of the capacity, with a few courses averaging in the mid-80% range. In courses that show slightly lower enrollment data, the sections that are low are typically those offered in the evening. Course Success Rates (broken down by race/ethnicity, gender, age) The data for Course Success Rates can be found in Appendix F. Course success rates vary from course to course and by race/ethnicity, gender, and age. In scanning the data, there is no obvious trend, based on demographics. Four-Year Course Success Trends 21

The data for Four-Year Course Success Trends can be found in Appendix G The course with the lowest success rate and the highest withdraw rate in 2011 was TR220. In an effort to improve success in this course, a co-requisite is being considered. TR143 and TR148 have relatively high withdraw rates and low success rates. Course grade distributions The data for Course Grade Distributions can be found in Appendix G The percentage of failing grades in TR143 is consistently high, relative to other courses, reaching 25% in 2009. Evaluation Questions 1. Is the program consistently attracting new students? Yes 2. Is the enrollment trend meeting established targets, ensuring program viability? Yes. If targets for enrollment have not been established, what should they be? 3. Do students appear to be progressing through the program well? Enrollment from the fall to winter semesters has been strong, showing progression, but students are not completing all of the requirements for a certificate. 4. To what extent are the targets for core program indicators (Student Participation in Nontraditional fields, Student Retention & Transfer, Credential, Certifcate, Degree Attainment, Student Completion in non-traditional fields, Student Placement, Technical Skills Attainment) being met? Are the various sub-populations meeting the targets at the same rate? Yes, see Appendix D. 5. Is the yearly ratio of the number of students enrolled to the number of graduates appropriate given program goals? No. Graduation rates are very low. 6. Are students obtaining employment upon graduation at satisfactory rates? Yes. 7. What does the course enrollment by semester data tell you? Enrollment data from the fall to winter semesters has averaged a decline of 8% from 2009 through 2012, which is a small number of students. 8. Are students passing courses at the appropriate rates? The TR220, TR148, and TR143 courses should be examined by the appropriate faculty member to determine the reasons behind low passing rates. Are the Course Success Rates the same for the various sub-group populations? No, but there is no consistency. In one course, students over 25 failed at high rates, but the same group performed well in another course. If not, where are the areas of concern? 9. Do the grade distributions seem appropriate for each course? If not, which courses are of concern? No, some courses (TR147, TR143, TR220) show trends of lower grades. 22

Action Needed Based on the documentation and evaluation in this section, please indicate if action or improvement is needed in the following areas within the department by making your response bold: New Student Enrollment Yes No Total Student Enrollment Yes No Student Progress Yes No Student Participation in Nontraditional Fields Yes No Credential, Certificate, or Degree Attainment Yes No Student Completion in Nontraditional Fields Yes No Student Placement Yes No Student Retention and Transfer Yes No Technical Skills Attainment Yes No Course enrollment by semester Yes No Course Success Rates Yes No Course grade distributions Yes No Documentation Program Curriculum History (last eight years) Curriculum Addition of hybrid-vehicle training in TR210 Automotive Ignition Systems Incorporation of Electronically-Controlled transmissions in TR240 Automatic Transmissions. TR140 and TR240 were moved from the first year of the associate degree program (922) to the second year. Additionally, these courses were removed from the certificate program (921). TR245 Automotive Chassis Systems has been approved, and it will be offered on the 2013-2014 schedule. Advisory Board Contributions The Advisory Board was consulted regarding both the restructuring of the certificate (921) program, the development of TR245 Automotive Chassis Systems, and the partnership with Snap-on to offer Diagnostic Certification. Members of the Board also participated in the NATEF Self-Evaluation, as part of the re-certification process. Courses Approved for Online Delivery- See Appendix E 23

TR147 Automotive Brake Systems has been approved for online delivery, but development has not occurred. Honors Courses- None Study Away Courses- None Course Equivalencies with Transfer Institutions- See Transfer Institution Spreadsheet Documented in AAAS (922) report Program/Course Equivalencies with K-12 Institutions Documented in AAAS (922) report Evaluation Questions 1. Is the program structured appropriately given the target student population and current student population (traditional, transfer, and/or adult learners)? Please explain. Yes, based on the data, the program offers the opportunities for success to a diverse student population. 2. To what extent is the program curriculum aligned with external professional standards (Industry, State, or National)? Are the current courses within the program or discipline appropriately and sufficiently addressing external standards? Please explain. Yes and yes. As part of the re-certification process, the program was examined and it was determined that additional coverage was needed in the areas of Brakes, Suspension & Steering, and Electronics. As a result, TR245 Automotive Chassis Systems was developed. 3. Does the program design and structure reflect external standards and best practices? Please explain. Yes, the program meets NATEF standards. 4. To what extent is the curriculum aligned with the first two years of transfer institutions? [Transfer Institution Curriculum Comparison] The curriculum is accepted by Ferris State University as a 2+2 transfer for their Automotive Management Program. 5. To what extent is the curriculum aligned with the coursework at K-12 institutions? The curriculum has been aligned with area skill centers that are NATEF certified. Due to changes in the NATEF program, further examination to ensure that the same standards are being met. 6. Do the program outcomes reflect the demonstrable skills, knowledge, and attitudes expected of students by the end of the program? Are the Program Student Learning 24

outcomes clearly stated and measurable? If not, what changes are suggested? Yes, NATEF standards meet all of these criteria. 7. Are all four of the ILOs and associated competencies integrated into the program? Do students have the opportunity to build the knowledge, skills, and attitudes associated with the ILOs throughout the program? [Curriculum Mapping] Yes. The programs technical courses, along with the required general education courses incorporate all of the ILOs. 8. Are the current course offerings sufficient in terms of breadth and depth? If not, what courses should be added and or eliminated? Yes, with the addition of TR245 to the schedule, the program meets NATEF standards. 9. Have general education courses been purposefully integrated into the program? Are the general education courses within the program appropriate and sufficient to support the learning associated with the Institutional and Program Learning Outcomes? The certificate (921) program does not have any general education courses. The only nonautomotive courses are MN116 Basic Welding and TE103 Technical Math. These courses fit the skill set that is needed for the occupation. 10. Are the honors and study away offering sufficient for the program? Not applicable 11. Do the course sequences require increasing application of higher-order thinking skills as students progress through the program? Yes, the course sequencing allows students to build on previous courses. Is the course sequence aligned in such a way that the Program Student Learning outcomes are mastered by the end of the program? Yes, all of the areas of automotive repair are covered, and students can master the NATEF learning outcomes by the end of the program. 12. Is experiential learning, including internships and academic service learning, systematically embedded into the courses? Experiential learning is incorporated into every automotive course, but internships and academic service learning are not. Are the current experiential learning opportunities sufficient? Please explain. No, there is a need for structured internships in the program. 13. Does the curriculum prepare students for a constantly changing employment environment, and prepare students to expect and manage change? Please explain. Yes, students in the program learn about existing technology and diagnostic approaches for future developments in technology. 14. Is the curriculum developed in such a way that it allows students to continue their education once they are finished with this program? Please explain. Yes, students have the opportunity to transfer credits to four-year institutions. Students are also prepared to participate in advanced training offered either by manufacturers or in the automotive aftermarket industry. 25

15. Are the online offerings (courses & number of sections) sufficient to meet student and programmatic needs? Student and programmatic needs for online offerings have not been measured. Action Needed Based on the documentation and evaluation in this section, please indicate if action or improvement is needed in the following areas within the department by making your response bold: Program structure Yes No Curriculum alignment with external professional standards Yes No Transfer alignment Yes No Curriculum Alignment K-12 Yes No Program Outcomes Yes No Program Learning Outcomes Yes No Course offerings Yes No General Education Yes No Honors Program Yes No Study Away Program Yes No Internship Yes No Academic Service Learning Yes No Course sequencing Yes No Pre-requisites Yes No Preparing students for change Yes No Online Offerings (courses & programs) Yes No Assessment of Student Learning Documentation Please answer the questions below for each assessment project that you are working on this year. If you have more than one project, simply cut and paste the headers for each section below, in order to create a report for each. Program Learning Outcome(s) assessed this year Students will take ASE Student Certification exams during the TR180 course in the summer semester. Results will be reported, when available. Measures of Student Learning [Please list the measures of student learning that were used this year (student work/measurement instrument] 26

Initial Data and Findings [Summarize the data and findings from the measurement of student learning. Add the detailed data to the appendices] Curricular or Pedagogical Changes Implemented [Briefly describe the curricular or pedagogical changes are planned or were made as a result of what you learned from the measurement of Program Learning Outcomes.] Data and Findings (post improvement/change) [Summarize the data and findings from the measurement of student learning after the improvements/changes were made. Add the detailed data to the appendices] Evaluation 1. Are licensure/certification exam pass rates are above national or state averages (if applicable)? If not, please explain what needs to be done to improve. 2. What are your greatest needs for support in order to continue to move forward with your assessment work? Action Needed Based on the documentation and evaluation in this section, please indicate if action or improvement is needed in the following areas within the department by making your response bold: Identifying Measures for each Program Learning Outcome Yes No Reporting out longitudinal data in a meaningful format Yes No Creating meaningful improvement projects Yes No Documentation Preparing for the future Job and Wage Forecasts- See Appendix I Job growth is predicted to slow over the next ten years, but the number of regional openings far exceeds the number of potential completions. Environmental Scanning/Trends An Environmental Scanning Report was conducted by GRCC s Institutional Research and Planning department in October, 2012. The research indicated that Michigan ranks 10 th in the nation in the number of job openings for mechanics. On a regional, three-county-area, level, the data in this report shows a 7% increase in mechanic jobs over the last three years. In the 27

past year, over 170 related job openings have been posted on internet sites. Forecasting data predicts over 80 annual openings for auto mechanics in the Grand Rapids area over the next 10 years. This data is supported by the job the placement surveys of graduates in 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 school years. PROE Student Survey Results- See supplemental data file Only one student completed the survey. Advisory Board Survey Results- Not Available for Automotive Programs Most of the responses were excellent. A few responses from the Advisory Board members shows that a few members did not know how well the about the program s performance related to: Demonstrates that students are prepared for entry-level employment Data is collected on job success and failures of former students. Will you take any actions with the program as a result of what you have learned? The addition of automotive technology internship courses should help to gather this type of data. The data can be shared with the Advisory Board and it could be used to develop benchmarks for improvement. Program Planning Over the next four years, the program plans to: Develop and offer internship courses Develop and offer on-line course(s) Become a Snap-on Diagnostic Certification Training Center Improve student advising Start a student organization to increase student involvement Evaluation Questions 1. Do the job projections and wages data suggest that this program will be viable over the next four years? Yes 2. Is the number of graduates aligned with the market need (job forecasts/transfer institutions)? Yes, positions far exceed the rate of completers. 28

3. What did you learn from the PROE Student Survey results? Will you take any actions with the program as a result of what you have learned? Nothing What did you learn from the Advisory Board Survey results? Will you take any actions with the program as a result of what you have learned? The addition of automotive technology internship courses should help to gather this type of data. The data can be shared with the Advisory Board and it could be used to develop benchmarks for improvement. 4. Are the resources sufficient to meet identified needs and goals for the next four years? Please explain. Yes, with the exception of the need for additional Snap-on diagnostic equipment. The program needs three Verus diagnostic systems to receive approval to deliver the Diagnostic Certification program. 5. Are the facilities and equipment adequate to facilitate teaching and learning? Please explain. Yes. The facility is at full capacity, but it is adequate. Action Needed Based on the documentation and evaluation in this section, please indicate if action or improvement is needed in the following areas within the department by making your response bold: Program Planning Yes No Securing resources for course development/administration Yes No Facilities/equipment upgrades Yes No Other: Yes No Other: Yes No Other: Yes No Other: Yes No Additional Tasks/Work Develop the Course Review schedule for the next four years (beginning with next year) See AAAS 922 plan Identify which courses from the department will be developed in online or hybrid format over the next four years. Indicate the highest priorities for online and hybrid development and the academic year in which the course will be developed. See AAAS 922 plan Review all publications, website, catalog to ensure consistency of information Complete the Follow-Up Action Checklist 29

Appendix A-Faculty Credentials & Certification Automotive Faculty Credentials Last First Name Employee Group Title Hi Educ Lv Bender Timothy Adjunct Faculty/Adjunct Bachelor's Hardy Ryan Adjunct Faculty/Adjunct Bachelor's Lee Randy Adjunct Faculty/Adjunct Master's Robinson Scott Adjunct Faculty/Adjunct Master's Atchison Brett Faculty Assistant Professor Bachelor's Beals Gayl Faculty Assistant Professor Master's Lodenstein Chad Faculty Professor Master's Smith Benjamin Faculty Assistant Professor Master's Automotive/Automotive Certificate Faculty with Academic Service Learning Credential None Automotive/Automotive Certificate Faculty certified to do online/hybrid teaching Chad Lodenstein Benjamin Smith Automotive Technician - Job Training Faculty certified to do online/hybrid teaching Gayl Beals 30

Appendix B- Program Enrollment New Fall Student Enrollment (FiTIACs) Count of new degree-seeking college-bound students who have declared a major (or are undecided) by mid-october; non-degree students and students on health program waiting lists are not included. Listed by plan code and description, for each of the past 4 fall terms, 2009-2012. Fall Program Enrollment Count of students who have declared a major (or are undecided) by mid-october. Listed by plan code and description, broken down by full-time and part-time students for each of the past 4 fall terms, 2009-2012. Most declarations are selfreporting or via department assistance, except for health programs, which are done explicitly by departments. Fall Enrollment by Plan 2009 to 2012--by Gender Count of students who have declared a major (or are undecided) by mid-october. Listed by plan code and description, broken down by students gender for each of the past 4 fall terms, 2009-2012. New Student Enrollment Major Code Program Fall 2009 Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 921 Auto Servicing, Cert 21 19 22 20 922 Automotive Technology, AAAS 44 73 62 64 Total Fall Enrollment 2009 2010 2011 2012 Major Code Program Female Male Total Female Male Total Female Male Total Female Male Total 921 Auto Servicing, Cert 3 55 58 2 65 67 3 40 43 6 45 51 922 Automotive Technology 3 158 161 12 207 219 10 197 207 11 197 208 31

Appendix C Student Progress Student Progress Tracking Degree-Seeking Students at the end of each year, starting with those enrolled in 2008-09 through 2011-12. This is reverse-looking, i.e. of those enrolled during the year, how many graduated or transferred out during the year, or are still enrolled in the next fall term? This is one indicator of success, and the total across will yield a combined grad/transfer/still enrolled percentage: 50s and 60s are common, 70s and 80s are good, 90s and 100 are superb. Automotive Servicing, Cert Major Code Academic Year N, Students Graduates Graduates/ Transfers Transfers Still Here Left Ed 921 2008-09 75 3% 0% 5% 37% 55% 45% 921 2009-10 94 2% 0% 4% 41% 52% 48% 921 2010-11 91 4% 1% 9% 32% 54% 46% 921 2011-12 65 6% 2% 3% 37% 52% 48% Grad/Transfer/ Still Here Automotive Technology Major Academic Year Code 922 2008-09 922 922 922 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 N, Students Graduates Graduates/ Transfers Transfers Still Here Left Ed Grad/Transfer/ Still Here 194 6% 1% 6% 47% 40% 60% 231 5% 2% 5% 42% 45% 55% 279 4% 0% 4% 42% 50% 50% 273 5% 0% 6% 46% 43% 57% 32

Appendix D- Program Indicator Data Technical Skills Attainment 1P1: % of CTE concentrators who passed technical skill assessments that are aligned with industry-recognized standards, if available and appropriate, during the reporting year (that can be identified - Credential, Certificate, or Degree Attainment 2P1: % of CTE concentrators who received an industry-recognized credential, a certificate, or a degree during the reporting year. Student Retention and Transfer 3P1: % of CTE concentrators who remained enrolled in their original postsecondary institution or transferred to another 2- or 4-year postsecondary institution during the reporting year and who were enrolled in postsecondary education in the fall of the previous reporting year. Student Placement 4P1: % of CTE concentrators who were placed or retained in employment, or placed in military service or apprenticeship programs in the 2nd quarter following the program year in which they left postsecondary education (i.e., unduplicated placement status for CTE concentrators who graduated by June 30, 2008 would be assessed between October 1, 2008 and December 31, 2008). Student Participation in Nontraditional Fields 5P1: % of CTE participants from underrepresented gender groups who participated in a program that leads to employment in nontraditional fields during the reporting year. Student Completion in Nontraditional Fields 5P2: % of CTE concentrators from underrepresented gender groups who completed a program that leads to employment in nontraditional fields during the reporting year. Automotive Servicing/Technology 2009 2010 2011 2012 Technical Skills Attainment N/A N/A N/A N/A Credential, Certificate, or Degree Attainment 27.66% 17.65% 20.00% 19.15% Student Retention and Transfer 69.93% 54.19% 68.42% 68.94% Student Placement 7.69% 50.00% 100.00% 66.67% Student Participation in Nontraditional Fields 3.90% 2.12% 6.47% 8.30% Student Completion in Nontraditional Fields 16.70% 0.00% 0.00% 10.23% 33

Appendix E- 2008 2012 Course Enrollment Data Summary Course Enrollment by Semester Count of enrollments in each course in each term from fall 2008 through winter 2013 (preliminary). Enrollment follows patterns of build-up through 2009 peak in 2010, slow return to normalcy in 2011 and 2012. Automotive Servicing/Automotive Technology 2008 2012 Course Enrollment Data Summary 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 Fall Winter Summer Fall Winter Summer Total Fall Winter Summer Total Fall Winter Summer Total Total Course 2008 2009 2009 2009 2010 2010 2010 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 TR 102 41 21 62 46 24 70 46 23 69 47 43 90 TR 103 37 21 58 45 24 69 47 24 71 44 23 67 TR 110 56 56 64 64 67 17 84 48 45 93 TR 140 32 21 53 45 24 69 41 23 64 39 24 63 TR 143 63 63 24 46 70 22 68 90 20 41 61 TR 147 57 20 77 64 23 87 60 24 84 67 67 TR 148 41 21 62 45 48 93 47 24 71 44 24 68 TR 160 62 62 72 72 22 45 15 82 19 41 60 TR 180 31 31 29 29 23 23 27 27 TR 210 42 21 63 44 23 67 44 24 68 45 24 69 TR 220 19 41 60 23 48 71 24 24 6 54 21 41 62 TR 230 18 41 59 22 47 69 21 48 69 24 42 66 TR 240 21 41 62 24 47 71 22 47 69 20 46 66 TR 260 30 30 31 31 30 30 29 29 TR 280 25 25 24 24 14 14 23 23 34

Appendix F - Course Success Rates (Success = grades A to C-) Course Success Rates AtD categories Course success rates (A-C divided by all grades) by subcategories: Race/Ethnicity, Gender, Fulltime/Part-time, and Pell Grant recipient/no Pell. 35

TR 102 Race/ Ethnicity Age White non- Hispanic Black non- Hispanic Hispanic Asian / Pacific Islander Native American Nonresident Alien No response or other Number Course 34 5 5 1 0 0 2 47 30 4 5 1 0 0 2 42 Percent Successful Course 88% 80% 100% 100% n/a n/a 100% 89% Less than 20 20-24 25 or older Total Number Course 11 22 14 47 11 20 11 42 Percent Successful Course 100% 91% 79% 89% Gender Female Male Total Number Course 0 47 47 0 42 42 Percent Successful Course n/a 89% 89% Total Pell Pell No Pell Total Number Course 24 23 47 20 22 42 Percent Successful Course 83% 96% 89% 36

TR 103 Race/ Ethnicity White non- Hispanic Black non- Hispanic Hispanic Asian / Pacific Islander Native American Nonresident Alien No response or other Number Course 32 5 6 0 1 0 1 45 25 4 6 0 0 0 1 36 Percent Successful Course 78% 80% 100% n/a 0% n/a 100% 80% Total Age Less than 20 20-24 25 or older Total Number Course 13 11 21 45 11 9 16 36 Percent Successful Course 85% 82% 76% 80% Gender Female Male Total Number Course 0 45 45 0 36 36 Percent Successful Course n/a 80% 80% Pell Pell No Pell Total Number Course 27 18 45 21 15 36 Percent Successful Course 78% 83% 80% 37

TR 110 Race/ Ethnicity White non- Hispani c Black non- Hispani c Hispani c Asian / Pacific Islande r Native America n Nonresiden t Alien No respons e or other Number Course 41 2 3 1 0 0 1 48 39 2 3 1 0 0 1 46 Percent Successful Course 95% 100% 100% 100% n/a n/a 100% 96% Total Age Less than 20 20-24 25 or older Total Number Course 12 17 19 48 12 17 17 46 Percent Successful Course 100% 100% 89% 96% Gender Female Male Total Number Course 5 43 48 4 42 46 Percent Successful Course 80% 98% 96% Pell Pell No Pell Total Number Course 23 25 48 22 24 46 Percent Successful Course 96% 96% 96% 38

TR 140 Race/ Ethnicity White non- Hispani c Black non- Hispani c Hispani c Asian / Pacific Islande r Native America n Nonresiden t Alien No respons e or other Number Course 30 2 5 0 1 0 2 40 25 2 5 0 0 0 2 34 Percent Successful Course 83% 100% 100% n/a 0% n/a 100% 85% Total Age Less than 20 20-24 25 or older Total Number Course 12 15 13 40 9 13 12 34 Percent Successful Course 75% 87% 92% 85% Gender Female Male Total Number Course 3 37 40 2 32 34 Percent Successful Course 67% 86% 85% Pell Pell No Pell Total Number Course 24 16 40 20 14 34 Percent Successful Course 83% 88% 85% 39

TR 143 Race/ Ethnicity White non- Hispani c Black non- Hispani c Hispani c Asian / Pacific Islande r Native America n Nonresiden t Alien No respons e or other Number Course 16 1 2 1 1 0 0 21 12 0 2 1 0 0 0 15 Percent Successful Course 75% 0% 100% 100% 0% n/a n/a 71% Total Age Less than 20 20-24 25 or older Total Number Course 4 9 8 21 4 6 5 15 Percent Successful Course 100% 67% 63% 71% Gender Female Male Total Number Course 0 21 21 0 15 15 Percent Successful Course n/a 71% 71% Pell Pell No Pell Total Number Course 12 9 21 7 8 15 Percent Successful Course 58% 89% 71% 40

TR 147 Race/ Ethnicity White non- Hispani c Black non- Hispani c Hispani c Asian / Pacific Islande r Native America n Nonresiden t Alien No respons e or other Number Course 47 9 6 2 0 0 3 67 41 5 6 2 0 0 1 55 Percent Successful Course 87% 56% 100% 100% n/a n/a 33% 82% Total Age Less than 20 20-24 25 or older Total Number Course 16 18 33 67 12 17 26 55 Percent Successful Course 75% 94% 79% 82% Gender Female Male Total Number Course 7 60 67 3 52 55 Percent Successful Course 43% 87% 82% Pell Pell No Pell Total Number Course 41 26 67 34 21 55 Percent Successful Course 83% 81% 82% 41

TR 148 Race/ Ethnicity White non- Hispani c Black non- Hispani c Hispani c Asian / Pacific Islande r Native America n Nonresiden t Alien No respons e or other Number Course 34 5 4 0 0 0 1 44 26 2 4 0 0 0 0 32 Percent Successful Course 76% 40% 100% n/a n/a n/a 0% 73% Total Age Less than 20 20-24 25 or older Total Number Course 13 8 23 44 8 8 16 32 Percent Successful Course 62% 100% 70% 73% Gender Female Male Total Number Course 6 38 44 3 29 32 Percent Successful Course 50% 76% 73% Pell Pell No Pell Total Number Course 27 17 44 21 11 32 Percent Successful Course 78% 65% 73% 42

TR 160 Race/ Ethnicity White non- Hispani c Black non- Hispani c Hispani c Asian / Pacific Islande r Native America n Nonresiden t Alien No respons e or other Number Course 14 3 2 0 0 0 0 19 11 2 2 0 0 0 0 15 Percent Successful Course 79% 67% 100% n/a n/a n/a n/a 79% Total Age Less than 20 20-24 25 or older Total Number Course 4 7 8 19 3 6 6 15 Percent Successful Course 75% 86% 75% 79% Gender Female Male Total Number Course 1 18 19 0 15 15 Percent Successful Course 0% 83% 79% Pell Pell No Pell Total Number Course 12 7 19 10 5 15 Percent Successful Course 83% 71% 79% 43

TR 210 Race/ Ethnicity White non- Hispani c Black non- Hispani c Hispani c Asian / Pacific Islande r Native America n Nonresiden t Alien No respons e or other Number Course 32 6 5 1 1 0 1 46 31 6 4 1 0 0 1 43 Percent Successful Course 97% 100% 80% 100% 0% n/a 100% 93% Total Age Less than 20 20-24 25 or older Total Number Course 11 17 18 46 11 15 17 43 Percent Successful Course 100% 88% 94% 93% Gender Female Male Total Number Course 4 42 46 4 39 43 Percent Successful Course 100% 93% 93% Pell Pell No Pell Total Number Course 28 18 46 26 17 43 Percent Successful Course 93% 94% 93% 44

TR 220 Race/ Ethnicity White non- Hispani c Black non- Hispani c Hispani c Asian / Pacific Islande r Native America n Nonresiden t Alien No respons e or other Number Course 16 2 2 0 0 0 1 21 9 2 1 0 0 0 0 12 Percent Successful Course 56% 100% 50% n/a n/a n/a 0% 57% Total Age Less than 20 20-24 25 or older Total Number Course 2 10 9 21 0 6 6 12 Percent Successful Course 0% 60% 67% 57% Gender Female Male Total Number Course 0 21 21 0 12 12 Percent Successful Course n/a 57% 57% Pell Pell No Pell Total Number Course 12 9 21 6 6 12 Percent Successful Course 50% 67% 57% 45

TR 230 Race/ Ethnicity White non- Hispani c Black non- Hispani c Hispani c Asian / Pacific Islande r Native America n Nonresiden t Alien No respons e or other Number Course 16 4 2 0 0 0 2 24 13 2 1 0 0 0 1 17 Percent Successful Course 81% 50% 50% n/a n/a n/a 50% 71% Total Age Less than 20 20-24 25 or older Total Number Course 4 10 10 24 2 7 8 17 Percent Successful Course 50% 70% 80% 71% Gender Female Male Total Number Course 1 23 24 1 16 17 Percent Successful Course 100% 70% 71% Pell Pell No Pell Total Number Course 15 9 24 12 5 17 Percent Successful Course 80% 56% 71% 46

TR 240 Race/ Ethnicity White non- Hispani c Black non- Hispani c Hispani c Asian / Pacific Islande r Native America n Nonresiden t Alien No respons e or other Number Course 13 3 3 0 0 0 1 20 10 2 3 0 0 0 0 15 Percent Successful Course 77% 67% 100% n/a n/a n/a 0% 75% Total Age Less than 20 20-24 25 or older Total Number Course 4 9 7 20 2 8 5 15 Percent Successful Course 50% 89% 71% 75% Gender Female Male Total Number Course 2 18 20 2 13 15 Percent Successful Course 100% 72% 75% Pell Pell No Pell Total Number Course 13 7 20 11 4 15 Percent Successful Course 85% 57% 75% 47

Appendix G- Course Grade Distributions Course Grade Distribution Fall 2008 2009 2010 and 2011 Earned grades by course, each fall term from 2009 to 2012. Grades are listed As to E, then I (incomplete), NS (no-show), W (withdrawal), WF (withdrawal-failing), and WP (withdrawal-passing). Extended analyses show success (grades A to C divided by all grades), and rates of withdrawal, no-show, and incomplete. Sometimes a low success rates are a result of high withdrawal and no-show rates. Automotive/Automotive Certificate Course Success Rate Trends Course 2008 2009 2010 2011 A-C %All Withdrawal %All A-C %All Withdrawal %All A-C %All Withdrawal %All A-C %All Withdrawal %All TR 102 33 80% 4 10% 37 80% 3 7% 41 89% 0 0% 40 85% 0 0% TR 103 31 84% 0 0% 35 78% 4 9% 42 88% 1 2% 35 78% 2 4% TR 110 41 73% 2 4% 48 75% 4 6% 51 76% 5 7% 44 92% 2 4% TR 140 25 78% 3 9% 37 82% 5 11% 37 90% 2 5% 34 85% 3 8% TR 143 25 78% 3 9% 13 54% 6 25% 20 91% 1 5% 14 67% 2 10% TR 147 48 84% 1 2% 58 92% 1 2% 47 78% 5 8% 53 79% 4 6% TR 148 27 66% 0 0% 30 67% 2 4% 35 74% 1 2% 29 66% 3 7% TR 160 27 66% 0 0% 30 67% 2 4% 14 64% 1 5% 14 74% 0 0% TR 210 25 60% 2 5% 30 68% 3 7% 33 75% 3 7% 41 89% 0 0% TR 220 15 79% 1 5% 20 87% 1 4% 18 75% 0 0% 11 52% 4 19% TR 230 13 72% 2 11% 18 82% 1 5% 18 86% 2 10% 17 71% 1 4% TR 240 13 62% 2 10% 17 71% 0 0% 16 73% 1 5% 14 70% 1 5% 48

Appendix H- Course Delivery Approvals Automotive/Automotive Certificate Courses developed for online/hybrid delivery None Automotive Technician Courses developed for online/hybrid delivery None Automotive/Automotive Certificate Honors courses offered None Automotive Technician Job Training Honors Courses Offered None Automotive/Automotive Certificate Study Away courses offered None Automotive Technician - Job Training Study Away courses offered None 49

Appendix I- Job and Wage Forecasts 143 Bostwick Avenue, NE Grand Rapids, Michigan 49503 Automotive Program Report GRCC Service Area Prepared by Institutional Research and Planning December 10, 2012 Economic Modeling Specialists International www.economicmodeling.com 1