GUIDED PATHWAYS SELF-ASSESSMENT TOOL

GUIDED PATHWAYS SELF-ASSESSMENT TOOL Self-Assessment Outline Scale of Adoption Key Element Pre-Adoption Early Adoption In Progress Full Scale Inquiry 1. Cross-Functional Inquiry X+ 2. Shared Metrics X 3. Integrated Planning X Design 4. Inclusive Decision-Making Structures X 5. Intersegmental Alignment X 6. Guided Major and Career Exploration Opportunities - X 7. Improved Basic Skills X 8. Clear Program Requirements X Implementation 9. Proactive and Integrated Academic and Student Supports - X 10. Integrated Technology Infrastructure X 11. Strategic Professional Development X 12. Aligned Learning Outcomes X 13. Assessing and Documenting Learning X 14. Applied Learning Opportunities X Overall Self-Assessment X+ 1

Self-Assessment Items INQUIRY (1-3) Engage campus stakeholders in actionable research and with local data; create consensus about core issues and broad solutions. KEY ELEMENT SCALE OF ADOPTION Pre-Adoption Early Adoption Scaling in Progress Full Scale 1. CROSS- FUNCTIONAL INQUIRY College constituents (including staff, faculty across disciplines and counselors, administrators, and students) examine research and local data on student success and discuss overarching strategies to improve student success. College engages in broad, deep and inclusive discussion and inquiry about the Guided Pathways approach, framework and evidence. College currently does not have or is not planning to form cross-functional teams to regularly examine research and data on student success. X Inquiry around guided pathways and/or student outcomes is happening in areas of the college (e.g., by department, division, learning community, special project, initiative), but it is in siloes. Some programs have examined local data, agreed that improvement is necessary, and are engaged in actionable research but action is limited to solutions within programs. Inquiry is happening in cross- functional teams that include faculty, staff and administrators. Student voice and/or research on student success and equity are not systematically included and/or focused on closing the equity gap(s). Guided pathways are consistently a topic of discussion. Please respond to the following items (500 word maximum per item) We believe we are at the Early Adoption Plus stage (beyond Early Adoption and not quite at Scaling in Progress). Inquiry is happening in cross-functional teams that include faculty, staff and administrators. Student voice is brought in systematically through focus groups, interviews and representation of students in key meetings. Research on student success and equity are systematically included and focused on closing the equity gap(s). Guided Pathways are consistently a topic of discussion. The latest Student Success Scorecard data shows that, overall, only 47% of students in the 2010-2016 cohort succeeded in achieving a degree, certificate or transfer after six years. Of those that were not college prepared, only 37% achieved this milestone. Scorecard momentum points 2

in Basic Skills courses and ESL, persistence and achieving 30 units demonstrate equally low rates and an alarming achievement gap. Our KPI data on the GP dashboard are equally distressing, such as only one in ten students completing transfer level English and Mathematics in their first year. These rates are unacceptably low. The college has spent the last two years intensively looking at these student success data in cross-functional teams and venues, the result of which propelled us to participate in the California Guided Pathways (CA GP) Demonstration Project Facilitated by a group of faculty and deans who attended the Research and Planning Group s Leading from the Middle Program, the college undertook the following activities from 2015-2017 that examined local student outcomes data and brought an awareness of some institutional barriers that have hindered student success: Book study group on Redesigning America s Community Colleges; included faculty, administrators, and staff. Team attendance at several statewide conferences and IEPI workshops on GP (7-12 participants at each) A two-day Guided Pathways Summer 2016 Institute (60 attendees including President, Vice-President of Instruction, a Board of Trustees member, faculty, staff and students). Three site visits with presentations by Dr. Rob Johnstone on GP to educate the college about the model. Five campus-wide professional development workshops (Flex Fridays) on various GP topics (exploring metamajors etc). In addition, the Governing Board has requested data presentations on the Student Success Scorecard and other student success metrics at every meeting while Faculty Senate, department chairs and Student Service leads receive data and reporting tool training on a regular basis. Departments receive disaggregated success and completion data for program review; departments examine these data, along with SLO assessment results, and design interventions to improve student learning. In addition, these data are used during grant and initiative development, to evaluate implementations and at governance and operational meetings. Engagement with data by more than the usual suspects is becoming more widespread. Since acceptance in the CA GP Demonstration Project last spring, the college has developed a structure to implement GP, with leadership from Instruction, Student Services and Administrative units, as well as the creation of a GP office, led by a Dean and Faculty Lead for Guided Pathways. Presentation of GP KPIs and other data are regularly occurring in some participatory governance committees such as the Faculty Senate and College Planning Committee, but GP is not yet consistently a topic of conversation at most meetings. While a dedicated effort to communicate this work has been in effect, there is still a lack of knowledge about GP in some parts of the campus, and especially with students. The student voice has been underutilized in our work so far. 2. Describe one or two accomplishments the college has achieved to date on this key element. 3

The college has accomplished several milestones on this key element, including: Creation of an inclusive cross-functional structure (detailed in question 4) that is supported by reassigned time and funding. The design asks the five GP workgroups, and its oversight group, the Pathways Implementation Team or PIT Crew, to analyze existing data, looking at what is successful and what creates barriers, and then to propose how to scale up what is working and/or create new processes if necessary. The goal is to implement GP in a manner that is sustainable over the next 3-5 years. Guided Pathways liaisons have been added to Faculty Senate, Institutional Effectiveness Committee, the College Planning Committee and the Governing Board to keep the campus informed about GP data and developments. Creation of an Office of Equity, whose leadership has helped the college to look at equity data as part of program review, and to create staff development opportunities focused on how to teach with an equity lens. Creation of local data tools like the Faculty Data Dashboard that allows instructors to gather a variety of useful pieces of information about students in their classes (demographic, age, courses taken, sequences) so that they may better help them to be successful. Creation of a GP website that profiles the work occurring across campus and provides resources for those who want to learn more. Alignment between the GP pillars and the goals of both the college s strategic plan and our Integrated Plan (the merging of SSSP, BSSOT and Equity). 3. Describe one or two challenges or barriers that you anticipate may hinder progress on this key element. Even though GP is part of campus-wide conversation, there is still a lack of understanding of all that it truly means. Some faculty, especially, are focused on the metamajor component of the model, rather than seeing GP as institutional transformation. While we have created cross-functional teams to implement GP, we are sometimes still thinking in siloed ways and seeing issues only from the perspective of our own components. The paradigm shift to a broader vision has not yet occurred. Another barrier is that the implementation ideas need careful analysis from IT in order to ascertain if the college s technology infrastructure can sustain them. Early efforts to fully integrate IT representatives into all areas of the GP structure have not been successful. Finally, though we have attempted to get student voices involved by having representatives on all parts of the implementation structure, we have not been very successful to date. We have much work to do in this area. 4

INQUIRY (1-3) Engage campus stakeholders in actionable research and with local data; create consensus about core issues and broad solutions. KEY ELEMENT SCALE OF ADOPTION Pre-Adoption Early Adoption Scaling in Progress Full Scale 2. SHARED METRICS College is using clearly identified benchmarks and student data to track progress on key activities and student academic and employment outcomes. Those benchmarks are shared across key initiatives. College is currently not conducting or planning to conduct research on shared metrics that could be used by crossfunctional teams to come to consensus on key issues. X Key benchmarks and progress on student data are used. They are beginning to be aligned across initiatives. College has defined metrics that are shared across its different initiatives. But, student data are not systematically or regularly tracked to inform progress across initiatives. Data for all metrics are not disaggregated and are not systematically and consistently examined with a focus on promoting equitable outcomes for students. College uses shared metrics across the different initiatives to understand how student success has improved. College regularly revises and revisits college plans in response to those findings. Data for all metrics are disaggregated. Data for all metrics are disaggregated and systematically and consistently examined with a focus on promoting equitable outcomes for students. Campus stakeholders meet regularly to examine progress on benchmarks, discuss strategies for improvement, and revise plans as needed. 5

Please respond to the following items (500 word maximum per item) 1. Please briefly explain why you selected this rating. We believe we are at the Early Adoption Stage because while a variety of key benchmarks, such as the Student Success Scorecard, the GP KPIs, Equity data, etc. are presented and discussed on a regular basis at the Institutional Effectiveness Committee, the Governing Board, College Planning Committee, and Faculty Senate, these are not aligned across initiatives. Even though there are a variety of reports and technology tools for disaggregation, as a college, Cabrillo has yet to identify the most meaningful indicators concerning student success. Integrated Planning, Multiple Measures, Acceleration, and Guided Pathways efforts are helping the college identify key performance indicators that are shared across the initiatives. But there is a range of responses to these student success metrics: Some are aware and concerned Some are aware but not concerned Others are not aware that there might be a problem. The last group often interprets the data using a range of explanations that blame students rather than seeing institutional barriers and issues. 2. Describe one or two accomplishments the college has achieved to date on this key element. The college has achieved four major accomplishments on this key element of Guided Pathways: Guided Pathways brown bags and presentations have helped identify KPIs that some in the college have shared concerns about in regards to overall student completion, success, and equity. The college leadership, including Cabinet, CPC, and Faculty Senate, is identifying them as the reasons why we need to implement Guided Pathways and improve student success at Cabrillo. The Case Statement we wrote for the California Guided Pathways Demonstration Project, which was drafted with input from major participatory governance committees, used these key data points to argue why we need to transform the institution to better support student success. The college has demonstrated a greater interest in the use of data to better understand Cabrillo students and the challenges that they face, both at the institution and in society. For example, Student Services has started to examine why students drop from one semester to another or why those who were admitted never enrolled at the college. Our program review processes now require that departments examine equity data. 3. Describe one or two challenges or barriers that you anticipate may hinder progress on this key element. 6

At present, we have identified two main challenges that may hinder our progress on this element: As part of program review, departments are starting to examine student success and completion through an equity lens. However, the conversation has not moved yet to trying to identify institutional barriers to student success. Some departments are engaging in pedagogical discussions about how to teach with an equity lens, but these efforts are not consistent across the college. Engaging adjunct faculty in this conversation is another challenge. We are struggling to find a way to engage the data skeptics in the conversation. Despite a very well-staffed research office producing a variety of reports and analytical tools, these documents may be underutilized or not fully understood. 7

INQUIRY (1-3) Engage campus stakeholders in actionable research and with local data; create consensus about core issues and broad solutions. SCALE OF ADOPTION KEY ELEMENT Pre-Adoption Early Adoption Scaling in Progress Full Scale 3. INTEGRATED PLANNING College-wide discussions are happening with all stakeholders and support/commitment has been expressed by key stakeholders to utilize the Guided Pathways framework as an overarching structure for the college s main planning and resource allocation processes, leveraging existing initiatives and programs such as (but not limited to): Student Success and Support Program (SSSP) Basic Skills Initiative/Basic Skills Student Outcomes and Transformation Program (BSI/BSSOT) Equity Planning (Student Equity/SE) Strong Workforce Program (SWF) College is currently not integrating or planning to integrate planning in the next few months. X Initial conversations have taken place, mostly among stakeholder leadership including administrators, faculty, and staff. There is a commitment by constituency leaders to engage in institution-wide dialogue to improve student success and align different planning processes. College governance bodies are routinely and formally apprised of opportunities to Some conversations have taken place, with all of the key constituency groups at the table. Consensus is building on main issues. Exploration of broad solutions to align different planning processes is still in progress. College governance bodies are routinely and formally apprised of opportunities to engage in integrated planning, and with the help of internal partners (i.e. Classified Senate and Academic Senate) are beginning to routinely inform and engage their College-wide conversations have taken place with all key constituency groups including: Instructional, counseling, and student support faculty and staff, administrators, and students. All stakeholders reach consensus or agree to move forward on main issues and have identified possible broad solutions. Research, evidence, student data and a Guided Pathways framework inform ongoing planning. Regular joint planning 8

engage in integrated planning. constituents around integrated planning. meetings revisit and revise existing plans and strategize about key overarching strategies across the main college initiatives. Integrated plans and over-arching strategic goals drive program improvement, resource allocation, as well as professional development using a Guided Pathways framework. College governance structures are regularly used to discuss issues, vet solutions, and communicate efforts. Please respond to the following items (500 word maximum per item) 1. Please briefly explain why you selected this rating. We are in the Early Adoption phase. We have made substantial strides to integrate all of the campus planning activities over the last five years, led by the college president and the work of the College Planning Council and the Institutional Effectiveness committee. This work intensified in the last year due to three important efforts: The writing of an integrated plan for SSSP, BSI/BSSOT and Equity, with shared goals and activities to avoid duplication and to better serve students, using data as a basis for decision-making. 9

Linking the goals of the college s strategic plan to Guided Pathways. Creation of IEPI PRT project to: 1) purchase new software to more easily integrate the planning and resource allocation processes at the college which now occur in several separate committees, and 2) identify processes and tools to better integrate grant development with strategic planning and budgeting. A shared understanding is starting to build. Despite these steps forward, we still lack consensus on the main issues or primary goals. Different groups on campus examine success data on our students and our GP KPIs, along with other relevant information, but we are not looking at those numbers holistically nor necessarily through a GP lens. There is an acknowledgement that GP is the umbrella or framework to integrate all the other initiatives and planning on campus, but this is more theoretical than put in practice at this time. 2. Describe one or two accomplishments the college has achieved to date on this key element. We have two main accomplishments in this developing area of focus: Goals for our Integrated Plan for SSSP, BSI/BSSOT and Equity and our Strategic Plan were linked to GP. Implementation of the new software program for integrating resource allocations (an outcome of our IEPI PRT project) will help avoid piecemeal resource allocation resulting from duplicity of effort and lack of communication. This should make it easier to identify top funding priorities for college which will align with our GP goals. 3. Describe one or two challenges or barriers that you anticipate may hinder progress on this key element. One of the challenges we have experienced in this area is timing. Here are three examples: Due to deadlines from the Chancellor s Office, the SSSP/BSI/Equity Integrated Plan was written before our GP structure was fully up and running or our GP goals formalized. As a result, GP planning, directed by the Pathways Implementation Team and then funneled to other participatory governance committees, did not occur in time to inform the Integrated Planning work. Rather, it was the other way around. Likewise, the integration of GP into our campus strategic plan occurred before the Pathways Implementation Team was meeting and so while the goals are linked, the PIT Crew has not yet had input into this. The new integrated planning software, adopted as a result of our IEPI PRT project, will have to be fully integrated into our developing GP structure. Another challenge we face is that we need to become more nimble in examining our practices for resource allocation by looking at them from a GP lens. 10

DESIGN (4-8) Establishing and using an inclusive process to make decisions about and design the key elements of Guided Pathways. KEY ELEMENT SCALE OF ADOPTION Pre-Adoption Early Adoption Scaling in Progress Full Scale 4. INCLUSIVE DECISION-MAKING STRUCTURES College has identified key leaders that represent diverse campus constituents to steer college-wide communication, input and decisions regarding the Guided Pathways framework. Constituents have developed transparent cross-functional work-teams to provide the Guided Pathways effort with momentum and regularly provide opportunities for broad college-wide input. College currently has not organized or is planning to organize crossfunctional teams or share governance committees that will inform and guide the Guided Pathways effort. Workgroups or teams have been created, but they are not yet inclusive of some key campus constituents: instructional, counseling, and student support faculty and staff, and administrators. The college plans to expand the teams through engaging governance structures and hosting broad, inclusive discussions and forums. X Cross-functional workgroups or teams (representing campus constituents) exist but there are no mechanisms yet identified for gathering and infusing collegewide input (including student voice) into the workgroup decision making policies and processes. Cross-functional workgroups or teams who steer the Guided Pathways design process utilize explicit and agreed upon processes for gathering college-wide input (including student voice). Cross-functional teams are in communication and collaboration with college governance bodies. In addition, this plan strategically engages college governance bodies collegewide. 11

Please respond to the following items (500 word maximum per item) 1. Please briefly explain why you selected this rating. We believe that we are at the Scaling in Progress stage. Cabrillo has shown its commitment to Guided Pathways by establishing cross-functional teams and providing release time for leaders and team members to undertake this work. The structure includes: Two co-leads, a Dean and a faculty member, at 80-100% release, respectively The Pathways Implementation Team (PIT Crew), an oversight group that coordinates and oversees all GP work Five workgroups. Four of these workgroups coincide with the four pillars of Guided Pathways; the fifth one is dedicated to the restructuring of Basic Skills, which the college considers an integral part of the Guided Pathways efforts. The PIT Crew and each of the five workgroups are composed of faculty, Student Service professionals, classified staff and administrators from all corners of the college. Members are a mix of Guided Pathways enthusiasts and skeptics. While we have sought student participation in our structure, we have not been successful in achieving it. The Student Senate president has agreed to serve on the PIT Crew, but hasn t been able to attend many meetings. We need to infuse more students into our process and find others ways, besides meetings, for them to participate. The teams will be tackling various aspects of GP implementation at different times. Each team is assigned to first analyze what the college already has in place in its area, gather data on the efficacy of its efforts and then propose how to scale up what is successful or create new processes to overcome institutional barriers. While all teams have met this semester, the Defining the Path workgroup is the one working most intensively now to help us define metamajors. Next semester, they will help the college map programs while the Entering the Path workgroup will begin its more intensive work to analyze our onboarding processes. Other groups will work more intensively starting next fall. 2. Describe one or two accomplishments the college has achieved to date on this key element. We are proud that when the Guided Pathways leadership team solicited volunteers to serve on Guided Pathways work groups during Fall Flex Week, ninety-seven individuals responded to the call. This allowed the team to make both the workgroups and the PIT Crew very diverse. There continues to be so much interest in getting involved, that the PIT Crew had to develop guidelines that address membership in the Guided Pathways work groups. 3. Describe one or two challenges or barriers that you anticipate may hinder progress on this key element. 12

We see several challenges as we move forward: Despite communication efforts, including a bi-monthly newsletter from the President s Office, there are groups of individuals on campus, in some cases entire departments or divisions, who are not engaged in the conversation and who may claim to have been left out after decisions are made. We will need to work even more intensively to communicate what is being done and to invite contributions from those who are not yet engaged. Guided Pathways work groups have yet to connect with existing participatory governance and decision-making processes. We are still trying to define how to include the campus-wide community when we reach key momentum points such as finalizing metamajors. We need to create a mechanism for voting and getting final approval after all input has been included. How do we close the loop? We have not been very successful in recruiting students to serve on GP workgroups. 13

DESIGN (4-8) Establishing and using an inclusive process to make decisions about and design the key elements of Guided Pathways. SCALE OF ADOPTION KEY ELEMENT Pre-Adoption Early Adoption Scaling in Progress Full Scale 5. INTERSEGMENTAL ALIGNMENT (Clarify the Path) College engages in systematic coordination with K-12, four-year institutions and industry partners to inform program requirements. College is currently not partnering or planning to partner with their feeder and destination institutions and/or local industry to align program requirements. X Coordination between high school feeder district(s), four-year institutions, and industry partners have been established, but the partnerships are not strong and/or inconsistent across the college. X Coordination between high school feeder district(s), fouryear institutions, and industry partners is occurring across the college, and some partnerships are stronger than others, with some pipeline alignment from each partner established. Coordination between high school feeder district(s), four-year institutions, and industry partners is occurring across the college, with strong partnerships and pipeline alignments across the various partners. Please respond to the following items (500 word maximum per item) 1. Please briefly explain why you selected this rating. We believe that we are at the Early Adoption stage. The college is engaged in a variety of coordination efforts with the area high schools, universities, and employers. However, these efforts are sporadic and not well coordinated across the college. While some partnerships are stronger than others in the cases of S4C, CTE and High School Articulation Committee (HSAC), oftentimes, it is hard to know how many coordination efforts we have, their goals, and who is engaged in them. As a result, we have a duplication of efforts without integration or communication between the groups. 14

2. Describe one or two accomplishments the college has achieved to date on this key element. We are proud of the following accomplishments in this area: Most CTE programs have strong connections to K -12, 4-year institutions, and industry. CTE curriculum is informed by industry advisors. Articulated courses are increasing in number, and we implemented The Career and Technology Education Management Application (CATEMA) software system, which automates credit award for high school students who take articulated courses. AEBG coordinator is working with the noncredit faculty lead and ESL, English and Math faculty to develop a transition plan for students from adult education to noncredit courses at the college. The goal is to better align program requirements. The Santa Cruz County College Commitment (S4C), a county-wide collaboration among educational institutions has several initiatives including: a Gates Foundation supported effort to improve college readiness in Mathematics across the county; coordinating the 4 th Grade Experience, which brings 4 th graders to Cabrillo College to increase college awareness; and a related 7 th Grade Experience bringing 7 th graders to local universities. The Outreach office has developed a plan that includes the noncredit program and has identified strategies to carry out the plan. Dual enrollment with high schools is in the process of being developed strategically. Comment [CM1]: Terrence, can you update with more relevant info they are doing a lot more in Math but I don t know how to describe. 3. Describe one or two challenges or barriers that you anticipate may hinder progress on this key element. There is a duplication of outreach efforts on campus, which sometimes results in the delivery of contradictory messages to the community. Current changes in CSU/UC requirements for entry and the passage of AB705 will challenge us to better communicate with local high schools, as well as Cabrillo students, about English and Math sequences of courses and how they related to admission, placement, and transfer. The college is interested in working with feeder high schools on dual enrollment, but we don t have a clear structure or resources to implement it at scale to build a cohesive and large program. The same is true for noncredit, as these courses span academic and career oriented departments across multiple divisions. 15

DESIGN (4-8) Establishing and using an inclusive process to make decisions about and design the key elements of Guided Pathways. SCALE OF ADOPTION KEY ELEMENT Pre-Adoption Early Adoption Scaling in Progress Full Scale 6. GUIDED MAJOR AND CAREER EXPLORATION OPPORTUNITIES (Help Students Choose and Enter a Pathway) College has structures in place to scale major and career exploration early on in a student s college experience. College is currently not implementing or planning to implement structures to scale students early major and career exploration. X Discussions are happening about ways to cluster programs of study into broad interest areas. Programs of study have been clustered into broad interest areas (such as meta-majors or interest areas) that share competencies. College has not yet implemented metamajors/interest areas. College has not yet created foundation courses, gateway courses or other scalable mechanisms for major and career exploration. Programs of study have been clustered into broad interest areas (meta-majors) that share competencies. Foundation and/or gateway courses, career exploration courses, workshops and other scalable structures are designed to help students choose a major early on. Cross-functional teams including instructional, counseling, and student support faculty and staff from different departments and divisions collaborate on clustering programs. Student input is 16

systematically included into the process. Please respond to the following items (500 word maximum per item) 1. Please briefly explain why you selected this rating.) At this time, we are in the Early Adoption phase, but by the end of this semester (December 2017), we should be at the Scaling in Process stage because our process to sort programs of study into metamajors will be complete. Since last spring, the GP workgroup called Defining the Path has been facilitating a college-wide process to define and name our metamajors. This cross functional team of Instructional and Counseling faculty, joined by classified staff and administrators, led a metamajor sorting exercise in fourteen campus venues with faculty, staff, students, and administrators during which teams were asked to sort all of the college programs into buckets of study and to name them. The workgoup compiled this data and then made a final determination for a draft of either six metamajors or four. This was presented to the college during our fall 2017 professional development week for feedback. Using the feedback, the metamajors were revised again and then sent to departments for comments. Departments were asked to either agree with their placement within a metamajor or present data that argued that they should be moved. The workgroup utilized the feedback to finalize the metamajors; we now have five. They are: Creative Arts and Design, STEM, Health and Public Service, Business and Computers, and Global and Human Studies. In addition, departments were also asked to vote on a term to use other than metamajor since data has shown that the word is confusing to students. Faculty have chosen the term Career and Academic Pathways. Students were asked to vote on the names for our Career and Academic Pathways. Four hundred and sixty students participated in a survey to name the metamajors. In addition, high school counselors were queried to make sure that these names would align with the career work they were doing at their schools. The Defining the Path workgroup is analyzing the results and will determine the final names by the end of Fall 2017 semester. 2. Describe one or two accomplishments the college has achieved to date on this key element. 17

We are proud that we surveyed such a diversity of student groups to name the Career and Academic Pathways. This is one of the few places where we have successfully achieved utilizing student voices in our GP work. Participants included students who were in their first year in college, Veterans, Foster Youth, EOPS students, Basic Skills students as well as others from gateway courses in certain fields. We are confident about the names of our Career and Academic pathways because we received opinions from such a varied group. Checking with high school counselors increased alignment between what the college is doing and our K12 partners. Another accomplishment is that the process we went through to do this work demonstrated the benefits of our GP structure. The sharing of information about what each GP workgroup at the Pathway Implementation Team (PIT Crew) meetings has led a different workgroup, the one focused on Entering the Path, to consider how to infuse career assessment into orientation and other on boarding processes. This way, students will be provided with data about themselves that may make it easier for them to choose a Career and Academic Pathway. 3. Describe one or two challenges or barriers that you anticipate may hinder progress on this key element. We are aware that sorting our programs into Career and Academic pathways is only a first step. The Defining the Path workgroup will facilitate a process to map programs next semester and, from reports from other colleges who are ahead of us in implementing GP, we expect that this process may prove to be more of a challenge. Faculty have already expressed fears that we may no longer offer some classes as a result of this process and others worry that programs in other Career and Academic Pathways will not recommend their specific GE courses to students, so they may see a decline in enrollment. Fear of the process and what it might mean will be a challenge to assuage. Another on-going major challenge will be to secure IT support to implement our Career and Academic Pathways and to redesign our website so that it features this new information along with all other aspects of our GP institutional redesign. 18

DESIGN (4-8) Establishing and using an inclusive process to make decisions about and design the key elements of Guided Pathways. SCALE OF ADOPTION KEY ELEMENT Pre-Adoption Early Adoption Scaling in Progress Full Scale 7. IMPROVED BASIC SKILLS (Help Students Choose and Enter a Pathway; Ensure Students are Learning) College is implementing evidence-based practices to increase access and success in college and/or transferlevel math and English, including, but not limited to: The use of high school performance for placement (i.e. cumulative GPA, course grades, noncognitive measures) for placement Co-requisite remediation or shortening of developmental sequence College is currently not engaging in or planning to develop strategies to improve student access and success in transferlevel math and English coursework. X College is currently piloting one or more of the evidencebased strategies listed in the key element description to increase access to and success in college and/or transferlevel English and math courses. College has scaled one or more instance of the evidence-based strategies listed under key element, but others are still in the pilot stage. College has scaled relevant evidence-based strategies and has attained large improvements in the number of students that pass college and/or transfer-level English and math courses within a year of enrollment regardless of initial placement level. 19

Curricular innovations including creation of math pathways to align with students field of study. Please respond to the following items (500 word maximum per item) 1. Please briefly explain why you selected this rating. We are in the Early Adoption phase, as we pilot multiple measures placement, develop co-requisite remediation in English and Math, and attempt to scale up Math Plus, which prepares students to retake the math placement exam or review material for an impending course. Multiple Measures Placement (MMAP): The college has been working on implementing MMAP and acceleration as part of a BSSOT grant since Fall 2016. As a result of this work, the Mathematics and English departments have adopted the statewide decision rules for MMAP. The timetable for implementation is: Fall 2017: The Mathematics departments embarked on a limited pilot using 60 students using mathematics MMAP placement protocols. Spring 2018: the college will use an automated system to place students with MMAP protocols for all incoming students who have transcript data in Cal-PASS (math) and will use self-reported GPA for English placement if Cal-PASS data are missing or incomplete. Fall 2018: MMAP placement will be available to ALL Cabrillo students, including students who do not have transcripts in Cal-PASS (out of state, older students, private high schools, charter schools, etc.) Acceleration: English is in the second year of a three-year acceleration pilot. Analyzing student success data, they discovered that only 33% of their students who started two levels below college in 2013 made it to transfer level within 3 years. In addition, these data revealed evidence of high disproportionate impact on students of color. This was unacceptable to the department, so it sent a group to the California Acceleration Project for training in acceleration models. This fall, the department adopted a co-requisite acceleration model that will begin in Fall 2018. The course that is two levels below transfer will be eliminated; the one that is one level below transfer will be redesigned; and students at transfer level who need it will take a co-requisite acceleration two-unit noncredit course along with English 1A, called English 1A Plus. The course design follows the California Acceleration Project (CAP) co-requisite model. Mathematics is at the pre-adoption stage for acceleration, looking at its departmental data, and exploring acceleration models through statewide trainings. They expect to select a model to implement by the end of Spring 2018. 20

Math Plus: Cabrillo began implementation of Math PLUS in 2013. Modeled after Pasadena City College s Math Jam, Math PLUS is a five-day, 30-hour program that provides tutoring, study skills and instructional services prior to the term for students placing below college level. They are then encouraged to retake the placement exam. Students who attend Math PLUS have a 68% rate of passing whatever math course they take, a 15% higher success rate than the college average of 53%. Over 60% of students who attended Math PLUS and retake the math placement test reassess one level higher in math. Their success rate the subsequent semester is 58% compared to the average math success rate of 53%. The Planning and Research Office conducted a set of quasi-experimental analyses and found that when controlling for background variables, Math PLUS participants entering Intermediate Algebra had success rates between 2 and 14 points higher depending on the method used. Math PLUS has increased from a pilot of 30 students to a one-week intensive math review offered every June, August and January. It was scaled up to reach 200 students in 2015/2016, and served over 600 students in the 2016/2017 academic year. 2. Describe one or two accomplishments the college has achieved to date on this key element One accomplishment is that the college has developed noncredit curriculum to further their placement and acceleration efforts: The English department has submitted its noncredit co-requisite remediation course to the college curriculum Committee which will discuss it in Spring 2018. The successful Math Plus curriculum was redesigned and is awaiting approval from the Chancellor s office as a series of noncredit courses leading to a certificate. Another success is that after some initial reluctance, members of the Mathematics department have attended acceleration trainings and visited Cuyamuca College to examine their acceleration model. 3. Describe one or two challenges or barriers that you anticipate may hinder progress on this key element. We are facing three major challenges that we must overcome in order to make progress in improving Basic Skills: While the Mathematics Department is embarking on getting trained in acceleration models and is piloting multiple measures placement, many members remain skeptical about concurrent remediation, and the efficacy of most of the changes it will engender. We are awaiting the Chancellor s Office guidance for how to implement AB705 and do not know yet how it will impact our local acceleration efforts at their current stage. In order to successfully implement a noncredit co-requisite acceleration model, we need to negotiate a different noncredit payment scale. 21

DESIGN (4-8) Establishing and using an inclusive process to make decisions about and design the key elements of Guided Pathways. SCALE OF ADOPTION KEY ELEMENT Pre-Adoption Early Adoption Scaling in Progress Full Scale 8. CLEAR PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS (Clarify the Path) College is clarifying course sequences for programs of study (including key milestones) and creating predictable schedules so that students can know what they need to take, plan course schedules over an extended period of time, and easily see how close they are to completion. College offers courses to meet student demand. In order to meet these objectives, college is engaging in backwards design with desired core competencies and/or student outcomes in mind (including timeto-goal completion and enhanced access to relevant transfer and career outcomes). College is currently not providing or planning to provide clear program requirements for students. X Some programs have worked to clarify course sequences, but teams do not represent crossdisciplinary teams of faculty. A few course offerings and schedules are designed to meet student demand. Some courses are offered at times, and in a manner, that enable students to complete their programs of study in a timely fashion. Cross-disciplinary teams of instructional (including math/english, GE, CTE) and counseling faculty have been convened and are mapping out course sequences. Some course offerings and schedules are designed to meet student demand and offered at times and in a manner that enable students to complete their programs of study in a timely fashion. Cross-disciplinary teams of instructional (including math/english, GE, CTE) and counseling faculty have mapped course sequences. Key educational and career competencies (including transfer and major requirements and labor market information) are used to develop course sequences. Teams create default program maps and milestones for program completion/transfer, so that students can easily see how close they are to completion. Course offerings and schedules are designed to meet student demand and are offered at times, and in a 22

manner, that enable students to complete their programs of study in a timely fashion. Please respond to the following items (500 word maximum per item) 1. Please briefly explain why you selected this rating. We believe we are at the Early Adoption stage. CTE programs, such as Accounting, Nursing, Medical Assistance, and other cohort-based Allied Health programs, have done good work to clarify course sequences and schedule them so that students can complete them in a timely manner. Most transfer programs, on the other hand, have created a model course sequence of sixty units, but do not schedule courses to ensure that students can complete in a two-year period for those attending full time. We are in enrollment decline and that has affected our thinking about course sequencing and offerings in a profound way. 2. Describe one or two accomplishments the college has achieved to date on this key element. The following accomplishments are helping us to achieve progress on this key element: In Fall 2017, Cabrillo created an Innovation task force, which is comprised of a variety of representatives from Instruction, Student Services, Marketing and Outreach, to analyze student enrollment patterns and create plans to increase enrollment. The task force has served to generate better communication between Student Services and Instruction about student needs as they piloted several successful efforts this semester, including: v Offering GE courses and other courses for which there is great demand at different intervals (week 4). For example, in Summer 2018, we will offer a 12-week summer session for the first time to allow for two six-week sessions so it is possible for students to complete two GE courses. v Beginning to advertise all these packages at the same time when schedule goes live. 3. Describe one or two challenges or barriers that you anticipate may hinder progress on this key element. We face several challenges that may hinder progress on this element: We have Student Ed planning data, but it may not be accurate because not all students officially declare their changes in majors. In addition, Student Ed Planning data are not used to clarify course sequences or schedule the course sequences. 23

We haven t surveyed students about course offerings in a program other than once every six years for program planning or found other ways to include the student voice to discover what they need in terms of scheduling patterns. We do not coordinate or track our General Education course offerings across divisions. It is only done within departments or a major, but not necessarily for the broader community. As a result, the college sometimes schedules competing courses at the same time, making it difficult for students to complete their GE or major requirements in a timely manner. We have an enrollment decline at the college and have not yet used Guided Pathways data or implemented portions of the model to provide a more predictable schedule to students. We know we needs to go year-round scheduling to improve student completion but we haven t done so yet. We are exploring the expanded use of our Ad Astra technology to help us schedule course offerings across divisions to avoid scheduling conflicts that hamper on-time completion of degrees and certificates. Our goal is to develop two year schedules for transfer students like we do for CTE students. Students will be able to register for an entire academic year. 24

IMPLEMENTATION (9-14) Adapting and implementing the key components of Guided Pathways to meet student needs at scale. SCALE OF ADOPTION KEY ELEMENT Pre-Adoption Early Adoption Scaling in Progress Full Scale 9. PROACTIVE AND INTEGRATED STUDENT SUPPORTS (Help Students Stay on the Path) College provides academic and non-academic support services in a way that is proactive and aligned with instruction, so that all students are explicitly engaged in these services. College is currently not implementing or planning to implement proactive and integrated student supports. X The college has begun conversations about increased coordination and collaboration between student supports, instruction, and counseling. Processes and tools are in place to monitor student progress and provide timely support; but are only used by a few staff and/or departments and are not used consistently. There are few and/or irregular structures that allow for support services staff, counseling faculty, and instructional faculty to meet, collaborate, and discuss Collaboration between the instructional and support services occurs in specific programs. Processes and tools are in place to monitor student progress and provide timely support; and are used by most staff and/or departments, but may not be used consistently. There are some structures that allow for support services staff, counseling faculty, and instructional faculty to meet, collaborate, and discuss ideas, the challenges students face, and ways to The college has been able to scale ways in which proactive supports are provided to most students. The college is able to track in which program each student is, and how far away students are to completion. Student progress is monitored; mechanisms are in place to intervene when needed to ensure students stay on track and complete their programs of study. There are several regular structures that allow for support services staff, counseling faculty, and 25

ideas, the challenges students face, and ways to improve coordination and support services. Please respond to the following items (500 word maximum per item) improve coordination and supports. instructional faculty to meet, collaborate, and discuss ideas, the challenges students face, and ways to improve coordination and supports. 1. Please briefly explain why you selected this rating. Although there are some programs that are very successful in this area, e.g. Engineering, Athletics, and cohort-based programs, the majority of programs at the college are at the Early Adoption phase. Cabrillo sees the value of integrating student supports with instruction, but we are not there yet. At times, counselors visit English, ESL and Math classrooms for presentations, tutoring centers work with some programs; mentors (faculty, staff, and peer) reach some programs, but this needs to be a more formal process with better coordination and buy-in from all instructors. Student supports are well integrated into learning communities, and after analysis of efficacy and scalability potential, this could prove to be a model. We do have some standard processes and tools in place to monitor student progress and provide timely support, such as the Degree Audit tool, but the college doesn t utilize these tools to capacity, with the exception of some cohort-based programs (EOPS, Athletics, S-STEM, and Puente). While students can go to tutoring and other academic supports on their own, and often do based on a teacher s recommendation, we no longer have Early Alert or any other standardized process to track faculty referrals, student responses to them (did they actually go?) and results (did it improve their performance in the course?). In addition, the last student focus group conducted by PRO revealed that students do not become aware of services soon enough (e.g. do not know about tutoring until their second year). Since students often have incorrect majors on file, the college is not able to accurately track in which program each student is. In addition, we do not have a standard software solution to tracking how far away students are from completion- it takes individual counseling appointments initiated by the students to get this information. Students progress is not monitored well and there are no alerts or mechanisms in place to warn them if their courses do not meet the objectives as stated by their major or program. Student Services and Instruction do interact within Faculty Senate and on various committees, most 26