<strong>San</strong> <strong>Juan</strong> <strong>College</strong> – <strong>AQIP</strong> <strong>Systems</strong> <strong>Portfolio</strong>- November <strong>2007</strong>Community InputNeed to provide basic skills training for the workforceDo more technical education career paths for high school studentsDevelop more specialized programs with local business and industryEnhance communication with middle and high school studentsBuild a closer relationship with Dine <strong>College</strong> (tribal college)Do more outreach to smaller communitiesExpand health occupationsNeed to extend current offering of four year programsNeed to extend current offerings of evening classes at off campus locationsNeed to extend current offerings of online classesProvide better disability information, access, servicesTable 5.7 Community Input into the Strategic PlanStrategic DirectiveValue Information and Market RealitiesValue Information and Market RealitiesValue Information and Market RealitiesValue PartnershipsValue PartnershipsValue PartnershipsValue PartnershipsValue Educational Access and Student SuccessValue Educational Access and Student SuccessValue Educational Access and Student SuccessValue Educational Access and Student Success5R2 The PACE survey is a nationally normedinstrument that was used for the first time in <strong>2007</strong>,therefore comparisons with the previous in-houseclimate survey are dubious. Use of a nationallynormed instrument permits the <strong>College</strong> to assess itsresults in comparison to other institutions.Figure 5.1 indicates that <strong>San</strong> <strong>Juan</strong> <strong>College</strong> deviatesmost dramatically from the national norm onInstitutional Structure, with a score of 3.01, comparedto 3.26 (on a scale of 1 to 5). <strong>San</strong> <strong>Juan</strong> <strong>College</strong> waslower on two domains than the national norm base(Supervisory Relationships and InstitutionalStructure), the same on one (Teamwork) and higheron Student Focus (Table 5.2).Specifically of most concern, however, is the meanscore of Institutional Structure as rated by functionalrole. The graph Figure 5.3 below indicates that facultyrate this domain as the lowest, falling into theCompetitive style.CollaborativeConsultative543Mean Scores of the Institutional Structure Climate Factoras Rated by Functional Roles at <strong>San</strong> <strong>Juan</strong> <strong>College</strong>Support StaffFacultyProfessional StaffThe graph below Figure 5.3 details the mean climatescore as rated by employees’ functional role.Competitive2CollaborativeConsultative54<strong>San</strong> <strong>Juan</strong> <strong>College</strong> Climate Compared with the NILIE PACE Norm BaseCoercive11 4 5 6 10 11 15 16 22 25 29 32 38 41 44Figure 5.2Mean Climate Scores as Rated by Functional Roles at <strong>San</strong> <strong>Juan</strong> <strong>College</strong>.5Collaborative3CompetitiveCoercive21SupervisoryRelationshipInstitutionalStructure<strong>2007</strong> PACENorm BaseTeamwork Student Focus OverallConsultativeCompetitive432Support StaffFacultyProfessional StaffFigure 5.1Coercive1Figure 5.3SupervisoryResponsibilityInstitutionalSt ruct ureTeamwork Student Focus Overall<strong>AQIP</strong> Category Five: Leading and Communicating 52
<strong>San</strong> <strong>Juan</strong> <strong>College</strong> – <strong>AQIP</strong> <strong>Systems</strong> <strong>Portfolio</strong>- November <strong>2007</strong>Overall, the following have been identified as areas inneed of improvement at SJC. All of these itemsrepresent the Institutional Structure climate factor.• The extent to which information is shared withinthis institution,• The extent to which open and ethicalcommunication is practiced at this institution,• The extent to which decisions are made at theappropriate level at this institution,• The extent to which I am able to appropriatelyinfluence the direction of this institution,• The extent to which spirit of cooperation exists atthis institution,• The extent to which this institution isappropriately organized,• The extent to which institutional teams useproblem-solving techniques,• The extent to which my work is guided by clearlydefined administrative processesOverall, the following have been identified as areas ofexcellence at SJC. Eight of the ten items representStudent Focus climate factor and two represent theSupervisory Relationships climate factor.• The extent to which I feel my job is relevant tothis institution’s mission,• The extent to which open students receive anexcellent education at this institution,• The extent to which this institution preparesstudents for a career,• The extent to which students are satisfied withtheir educational experience at this institution,• The extent to which faculty meet the needs ofstudents,• The extent to which student ethnic and culturaldiversity are important at this institution,• The extent to which I am given the opportunity tobe creative in my work,• The extent to which this institution preparesstudents for further learningImprovement (I)5I1 Feedback from students, faculty, staff andstakeholders is reviewed regularly at all levels of theinstitution as described below in Table 5.8. If thedata indicate a negative trend, it is reviewed,discussed and analyzed.5I2 SJC leadership has identified improvingCommunication <strong>Systems</strong> as a strategic priority in<strong>2007</strong>-2008. This priority has emerged in light of theresults of the PACE survey. A cross-functionalCommunications and Input Design Team has beencharged with recommending institutional processesthat will enhance channels for communication andinput in order to provide as a basis for sustainingcontinuous improvement at <strong>San</strong> <strong>Juan</strong> <strong>College</strong>.In focusing on communication and input, the team willconcentrate on the five top areas in need ofimprovement as identified in the report of the results:• The extent to which information is shared withinthis institution• The extent to which open and ethicalcommunication is practiced at this institution• The extent to which decisions are made at theappropriate level at this institution• The extent to which I am able to appropriatelyinfluence the direction of this institution• The extent to which a spirit of cooperation existsat this institutionThe design process will be:• Strategic in terms of impacting the results the<strong>College</strong> aims to provide to society and tostudents as they progress in their programs oflearning.• Collaborative so as to ensure broad-basedparticipation and a means for stakeholder groupsto be heard and to influence therecommendations.• Focused on building trust through effectivecommunication and negotiation that makes it safeto identify and challenge assumptions, andsupport agreements on shared values andmutual commitments that are aligned with SJC’sVision, Values, and Mission.• Will be meaningful in that it will lay the foundationfor recommendations intended to establish ameans for communication and input that willassist in furthering decisions that will shape theimplementation of the SJC Strategic Plan.• Data-informed, using qualitative and quantitativedata that are reviewed as recommendations forcontinuous improvement are developed.• Expected to provide progress reports to thePresident’s Cabinet on 26 November <strong>2007</strong> and05 April 2008 as a year end report. Responsiblefor communicating its work to all <strong>College</strong>employees and students.The recommendations from the design process will:• Result from benchmarking at least three modelsat other institutions of higher education.• Include formative and summative evaluationcomponents that employ agreed uponperformance indicators that can be used toassess the effectiveness of the proposals that areimplemented.• Propose sustainable collaborative processes thatcan be functionally integrated into the operationof the <strong>College</strong> in ways that will sustain continuousquality improvement.• Support collaborative processes that ensure thatinitiatives of the Strategic Plan align with theVision, Values, and Mission of the <strong>College</strong>.<strong>AQIP</strong> Category Five: Leading and Communicating 53