City College of San Francisco - California Competes

THEME II
outcomes assessment in the institutional culture is still evolving, the value the College places on student
success will provide the context for future work on SLOs. This discussion of the institutional context is
followed by two case studies. The first describes the efforts of CCSF’s English Department to use common
assessment instruments to restructure its reading and composition course sequence. This case study reveals
that the assessment of student learning outcomes can influence specific objectives and methodologies used
by a very large cohort of instructors across a sequence of courses. The second case study describes the work
of the leadership from all of the units in the Student Development Division to create a comprehensive,
division-wide SLO initiative. While this endeavor is still in the formative stages, it demonstrates the commitment
of the leadership to the process. More importantly, the case study reveals a clear understanding
of the benefits and challenges this type of assessment poses for the various student development units
and a commitment to meet those challenges to improve student outcomes.
II. Institutional Context
The Information the College Gathers and Pays Attention to. The Standard I Report on the Mission
Statement and Institutional Effectiveness clearly delineates how the goals of the Mission Statement are
translated into a comprehensive Strategic Plan and how that plan is connected to the annual planning
and budget cycle as well as semi-annual assessments of progress. The Mission Statement establishes that
“the quality of success in learning will permeate all levels of the educational experience.” While all of the
major priorities in the Strategic Plan are designed to support “success in learning,” four of those strategic
priorities directly address student learning outcomes (see Strategic Priorities 1, 2, 3, and 5).
As Astin suggests, the value the College places on these broadly stated institutional priorities is reflected
in the information it gathers about our effectiveness in achieving those goals. Therefore, in 2003, at the
request of the Board of Trustees and the Chancellor, the Office of Research, Planning and Grants developed
a set of 29 College Performance Indicators (CPIs) that “measure College performance within the
eight priorities delineated by the CCSF Strategic Plan.” 2 Each year, a report on these 29 measures is
provided to the College community. By definition, these performance indicators give us only the broadest
information about institutional effectiveness, particularly as they relate to student learning. For example,
Priority 1 indicators for basic skills show “overall student success rates in pre-collegiate courses” and
“completion rates for students in pre-collegiate programs.” However, these indicators do just that—indicate
areas for further assessment, analysis, and program development in the College’s efforts to improve
student outcomes.
The CPI reports suggested that the College’s efforts to develop students’ basic skills deserved a much more
focused and comprehensive analysis. With over 75 percent of our first-time students placing into one or
more pre-collegiate courses, 3 and with a broad range of programs and services designed to promote student
learning within these basic skills courses, the College needed better information on what works, what
does not add value, and, eventually, how the College can best use its resources to assure the highest level
of student learning outcomes. Therefore, in Spring 2003, the Office of Research, Planning and Grants
embarked on the development of the “Pre-Collegiate Basic Skills Accountability Report” in collaboration
with faculty and administrative leadership involved in the basic skills programs and services. The two-part
report published the next spring provided a comprehensive assessment of the demand, supply (i.e., access),
2 College Performance Indicators: Academic Year 2003-2004, CCSF Office of Research, Planning, and Grants, January 2005, p.3.
3 Only 2.2 percent of entering students place into college-level English and Math. Twenty-two (22) percent of the first-time
students were not assessed.
262 CITY COLLEGE OF SAN FRANCISCO