SPRINGFIELD TECHNICAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE · institutional effectiveness and expanded the assessment...

SPRINGFIELD TECHNICAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE FIFTH-YEAR INTERIM REPORT 2016

Prepared for the Commission on Institutions of Higher Education New England Association of Schools and Colleges, Inc. March 2016

STCC 2016 Fifth-Year Interim Report page 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................page 3 INSTITUTIONAL OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................... page 4 AREAS IDENTIFIED FOR SPECIAL EMPHASIS ................................................................................. page 5

Area of Emphasis 1.......................................................................................................... page 5 Area of Emphasis 2.......................................................................................................... page 9 Area of Emphasis 3.......................................................................................................... page 10 Area of Emphasis 4.......................................................................................................... page 13

STANDARD ONE: Mission and Purpose ........................................................................................ page 14 STANDARD TWO: Planning and Evaluation .................................................................................. page 16 STANDARD THREE: Organization and Governance ...................................................................... page 17 STANDARD FOUR: Academic Program ......................................................................................... page 18 STANDARD FIVE: Faculty .............................................................................................................. page 22 STANDARD SIX: Students ............................................................................................................. page 24 STANDARD SEVEN: Library and Other Information Resources .................................................... page 26 STANDARD EIGHT: Physical and Technological Resources .......................................................... page 27 STANDARD NINE: Financial Resources ......................................................................................... page 29 STANDARD TEN: Public Disclosure ............................................................................................... page 31 STANDARD ELEVEN: Integrity ...................................................................................................... page 32 ASSESSMENT, RETENTION, and STUDENT SUCCESS .................................................................... page 33 INSTITUTIONAL PLANS ................................................................................................................. page 52

APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................. page 56

A: Affirmation of Compliance ......................................................................................... page 57 B: Most Recent Audited Financial Statement ................................................................. page 59 C: Auditor’s Management Letter .................................................................................... page 116 D: Data First Forms ......................................................................................................... page 118 E: E1a and E1b Series ...................................................................................................... page 134 F: S Series ........................................................................................................................ page 167 G: AUC Bylaws ................................................................................................................. page 181 H: Board of Trustees Membership .................................................................................. page 187 I: STCC Organizational Chart ........................................................................................... page 191


INTRODUCTION Springfield Technical Community College began the organization and review for this NEASC Fifth-Year Interim Report during 2014 while conducting the self-study and work to develop the STCC 2015-2020 Student Success Plan: A Strategic View (SSP). In many respects, the Fifth-Year Interim Report provided the College with the opportunity to continue the review of and planning to improve the outcomes of our students. As noted in the SSP document,

The STCC 2015-2020 Student Success Plan: A Strategic View is the result of hours spent collecting stories, comments, and ideas from faculty, staff, students, and employers to answer some basic questions about our work at the College: What are the issues our students face? Why are they issues? What do we really want for our students? How will we get them there?

The Fifth-Year Interim Report was prepared under the direction of Vice President/Chief Academic Officer, Dr. Arlene Rodriguez and Dean of Institutional Effectiveness, Dr. Barb Chalfonte. Members from relevant College committees (e.g., Strategic Plan Steering Committee, All-Unit Congress) and people who served on the 2010 NEASC Self-Study Standards Committees were asked to serve on small teams. Standards Committees are listed below:

Committee Chair Members

Standard One: Mission and Purpose

Dr. Adrienne Smith, Dean of Engineering Technologies and Math

Dr. Ching Yim, Chemistry Faculty; Dr. Tracey Trottier, Director of Assessment

Standard Two: Planning and Evaluation

Leona Ittleman, Dean of Business and Information Technologies

Brian Candido, Computer Information Technology Program Chair/Faculty; Dr. Tracey Trottier, Director of Assessment

Standard Three: Organization and Governance

Dr. Brandon Poe, Biology Faculty/Co-Chair All-Unit Congress

Luanna Saunders, Staff Assistant/Vice President Academic Affairs; Meg Woble-Valenski, Physical Therapy Assistant Program Chair/Faculty

Standard Four: Academic Programs

Michael Foss, Dean of Health & Patient Simulation

Dr. Robert Dickerman, Dean of Science & Engineering Transfer; John Diffley, History Faculty; Suzanne Smith, Director of Institutional Research & Analysis

Standard Five: Faculty Dr. Arlene Rodriguez, Vice President of Academic Affairs

Terri Tansil-Woods, Human Resources Generalist; Eric S. Brown, Psychology Faculty

Standard Six: Students Kamari Collins, Interim Vice President of Student & Multicultural Affairs

Louisa Davis-Freeman, Dean of Admissions; Seth Dupuis, Criminal Justice Faculty

Standard Seven: Library and Information Services

Barbara Wurtzel, Dean of Library Services

Erica Eynouf, Reference Librarian/Electronic Resource Manager; Clifton Porter, Senior Director of IT Applications

https://www.stcc.edu/aboutstcc/pdfs/STCCStudentSuccessPlan.pdf

https://www.stcc.edu/aboutstcc/pdfs/STCCStudentSuccessPlan.pdf


Standard Eight: Physical and Technological Resources

Maureen Socha, Senior Director of Facilities

Robert Trusch, Senior Director of IT Infrastructure; Thomas Therrien, Chief Power Plant Engineer/HVAC Department Head

Standard Nine: Financial Resources

Joseph DaSilva, Vice President of Administration/CFO

Jeremy Greenhouse, Director of Financial Aid; Rhoda Belemjian, Business/Accounting Faculty; Jonathan Tudryn, Comptroller

Standard Ten: Public Disclosure

Joan Thomas, Director of Marketing

Matthew Gravel, Dean of Enrollment Management; Philip O'Donoghue, English/Theatre Faculty

Standard Eleven: Integrity Joan Nadeau, Senior Director of Human Resources

Shawn deJong, Chief of Police; Dr. Anthony Guillory, History Faculty

STCC’s Senior Director of Facilities, Maureen Socha, addressed Area of Emphasis 3: Facilities and Dr. Brandon Poe contributed to Area of Emphasis 2: Internal Governance. The remainder of the report was written by Dr. Arlene Rodríguez and Dr. Barb Chalfonte with critical contributions from members of the Institutional Effectiveness Department including Suzanne Smith, Director of Institutional Research & Analysis; Linda Chretien, Institutional Research Assistant; Dr. Tracey Trottier, Director of Assessment; Beverly Pead, Assessment Coordinator and Adjunct Faculty in Early Childhood Education; and Mary Ellen Caloon, Institutional Effectiveness Assistant. Critical assistance was also provided by Luanna Saunders, Academic Affairs Staff Assistant and by David Winsper, English Faculty, who edited the document. Of note, during the development of this report, Massachusetts Community College Council (MCCC) union members of the College, who have been valiantly working without a state contract since July 2015, went on Work-to-Rule. Data referenced in this document were provided by the STCC Offices of Institutional Research and Assessment, with benchmark data from the Department of Higher Education and from Achieving the Dream. Additional data were from sources used in the development of the STCC 2015-2020 Student Success Plan. INSTITUTIONAL OVERVIEW A comprehensive, urban, public community college and Achieving the Dream (ATD) Leader College, Springfield Technical Community College is a major resource for workforce, economic, and community development in Western Massachusetts. As the only technical community college in the state, STCC offers career degree and certificate programs available at no other public community college and at a markedly lower cost than private or proprietary schools. For the 2014-2015 academic year, STCC conferred 935 associate’s degrees and 170 certificates, one of the largest classes in the College's 48-year history. Founded in 1967, STCC is located on 35 acres of the Springfield Armory National Historic Site. The College operates and maintains one million square feet of space; however, most of the buildings are historic and not used for classrooms. Three buildings built in the 1970’s and 1980’s are used for instruction and faculty offices; administrative offices, student support, admissions, financial aid and other offices are located in historic buildings. With budget cuts and continued long-term deferred


maintenance, STCC is constantly addressing an aging infrastructure that requires immediate repair and, in some cases, complete replacement. Please refer to Area of Emphasis 3 and in Standard Eight to learn more about these challenges. With an open-enrollment policy, STCC provides a pathway to prosperity for area residents with a high school diploma or equivalency through short-term certificate programs, associate’s degree programs with career and transfer options, and non-credit courses. STCC also provides access to programs in the health and STEM areas with competitive admissions criteria. As a public community college, STCC serves as a low-cost entrance to higher education. The cost of attending STCC is four-times lower than attending a Massachusetts public state university. The Fall 2015 enrollment figures (see the Data First forms) reflect local demographic trends that inform how STCC works to serve its students. More than half of STCC students attend part-time (57% versus 43% attending full-time) and are female (57% versus 43% male). In Fall 2013, STCC became a Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI) with 26.4% full-time equivalent (FTE) Hispanic Students; in Fall 2015, 28.4% of the full-time equivalent students identified as Hispanic. STCC is one of just three colleges in the Commonwealth to be an HSI. Students of color are a majority of those enrolled in the Fall 2015 semester, making up 51% of total STCC headcount. Changes in the area demographics have meant that more of our students enter the College with increasingly diverse life and educational experiences. Unfortunately, for about 70% of our students, their first few semesters are spent in developmental education. Initiatives to accelerate developmental education work and to use different placement tools are being piloted and some initiatives will be expanded in the coming year (refer to Standard Four and the essay Assessment, Retention, and Student Success). To teach and serve its students, STCC has 141 full-time faculty and 333 part-time or adjunct faculty, with a student-to-faculty ratio of 16:1. In the 2010 NEASC Self-Study Report, the College described the period between 2001-2005 as “eventful” and the years that have followed have been just as eventful, if not more so. The next year will bring a new President to STCC, accompanied by changes to the senior administration of the College including new Vice Presidents of Academic Affairs as well as Student and Multicultural Affairs. With these changes to administrative staff, student demographics, and work based on the College’s 2015-2020 Student Success Plan, our efforts to improve our teaching and support of our STCC students are more urgent than ever. AREAS IDENTIFIED FOR SPECIAL EMPHASIS AREA OF EMPHASIS 1: Developing and implementing a comprehensive approach to assessing institutional effectiveness and student learning, including the use of data to inform planning and decision making. Since the time of our last report (August 2013), STCC has developed a comprehensive approach to institutional effectiveness and expanded the assessment of student learning. Our Institutional Effectiveness (IE) department not only includes Institutional Research and Assessment Offices, but also now includes a Professional Development Office and leads the College’s strategic planning efforts. Reports on all quantitative and qualitative findings are shared with the College’s Student Success Council (SSC), a group that has college-wide representation including membership from the All-Unit Congress


(see Area of Emphasis 2). The SSC has multiple critical functions including: (1) supporting the review and dissemination of student success outcomes to the College; (2) serving as an oversight group for implementation of the Student Success Plan; (3) serving as the advisory group to our new Title III: Strengthening Institutions Program grant (designed to improve equity in course and completion outcomes); and, (4) providing recommendations to individuals and groups who are developing and improving student success-related processes at the College. Assessment Methods About three years ago, the College established the Core Competency Assessment Team (CCAT) comprised of 10-12 full-time and adjunct faculty representing each academic division to assess institution-wide learning competencies (Written and Oral Communication, Critical Thinking, Quantitative Reasoning, Information Literacy, Computer Literacy). Each spring, on behalf of the CCAT, the Office of Assessment collects student work samples, redacts student- and faculty-identifying information, and obtains the corresponding student demographics and course completion data from the Office of Institutional Research. Then, at the beginning of the summer, the CCAT meets for a day to practice scoring (using LEAP Value rubrics) and to establish their criteria for rubric use which are captured in a written document. Faculty pairs then score samples using the rubrics and criteria, and the data are analyzed. At the end of the summer, the CCAT gathers again to review the findings and to make recommendations for communicating the results to the College, incorporating the findings into the Faculty Professional Development Day, and developing workshops to support faculty through the academic year. The group determines the competency they will assess the following year and evaluates the institution-wide assessment process itself. Over the last three summers, the CCAT has assessed Written Communication, Critical Thinking, and Qualitative Reasoning drawing from 200-300 samples from all College divisions for each competency. Results from these activities are shared with the SSC and with deans, faculty and staff at college and division meetings. The findings of this group and how they guide the actions taken by the Professional Development Center as well as inform changes to program- and course-level pedagogy are described in the essay on Assessment, Retention, and Student Success. At the program level, eight departments have received external accreditation since our last NEASC self-study, two more programs are currently being reviewed for reaccreditation, and two (Early Childhood Education, Health Information Technologies) are exploring new professional accreditation. Most recently, our Clinical Laboratory Sciences program received accolades for their assessment work and student learning outcomes in particular. Likewise, our Nursing department received full accreditation without reservations. For departments and programs without external accreditation, the College has developed the Student Outcomes Annual Reflection (SOAR) process. This annual process commences each year at the fall faculty professional development day and gives faculty members time to discuss department- and program-level outcomes, to review data collected over the last year, and to determine goals and actions for the current academic year. A similar process started last year for support and service departments during their professional development day as well. Each year, the IE department


collects data on the SOAR process itself to refine and improve it. The outcomes of these processes are described in the essay on Assessment, Retention, and Student Success. Quantitative and Qualitative Data for Planning and Decision Making The Institutional Research Office continues to make excellent strides building out the Institutional Research Data Mart (IRDM) to support longitudinal analyses of progress, retention, and completion at all levels. Capitalizing on the IRDM, the IR Office now produces department reports that include course success rates (proportion of students earning A, B, or C grades) since those rates are consistent across

departments and are one of the best predictors of retention and graduation. The IR Office also supports many department-level information requests investigating students’ pre- and post-completion transfers to area 4-year colleges and universities. The IE department is also now responsible for meeting daily enrollment reporting needs. Faculty and staff receive training on survey methods and our Qualtrics software and often collect indirect data for their courses, programs, and services. Based on the results of survey findings, our College Honors program has been updated, our developmental English faculty are exploring underserved student outcomes in depth, and our programs with external accreditation are able to take corrective actions based on feedback from their students, clinical instructors, and employers.

Likewise, newly-developed reports based on Community College Survey of Student Success (CCSSE) results and our annual Graduating Student Survey are used by faculty and staff to inform their improvement efforts. For example, one faculty member revised a capstone assignment based on CCAT (direct) and CCSSE (indirect) findings that ultimately improved his students’ ability to meet their course learning objectives and improved their oral communication skills. Data from these CCSSE reports contributed to the Student Success Plan and serve as benchmarks for improvement actions over the next five years in areas such as civic learning and career readiness opportunities. In the essay on Assessment, Retention, and Student Success, quantitative and qualitative data are reviewed and actions for continued improvement are described in more detail.


The IE Department also launched an Innovation Grant program to support advances in program and course level assessment and pedagogy. Over the last three years, both full and part-time faculty from all academic divisions were awarded grants. Examples of exemplary work include one department’s “assessment of their assessments” to improve their students’ clinical laboratory skills (see feature to the right) and a faculty member’s study of limited versus unlimited quizzes to assess and improve student learning in Introductory Biology. These efforts results in improved student success outcomes in both programs. Professional Development to support Student Success Work Quantitative and qualitative assessment data are meaningless unless they result in improvements and efforts to expand successful initiatives. To deliver the results of course, program, and institutional level findings as well as to help people develop the skills to address student needs and make pedagogical changes, we have a new Learning Engagement and Advancement Office. The Learning Engagement and Advancement Office, or Professional Development Center as it is more commonly called, uses information from the IR and Assessment Offices, as well as feedback from faculty, staff, and students, to provide support to those in the campus community who help our diverse population of student learners become successful in their attainment of college-wide student learning outcomes and credentials. Whether through meetings with individuals, groups of faculty and staff, workshops, or travel to other professional development opportunities, the office strives to create an inclusive, culturally-responsive learning environment where faculty and staff can improve their knowledge and application of pedagogy and other methods of working with our wide range of student learners. STCC faculty and staff have been participating in state-wide assessment efforts including AMCOA which supports campus-level assessment professional development and work, attending regional and state conferences and workshops, and representing STCC on the statewide Taskforce on Assessment for the Vision Project. Strategic, Student Success Planning The culmination of the changes and improvement the College has made to Institutional Effectiveness can be seen in our strategic planning efforts. Last year, the College and all of its stakeholders including faculty, staff, students, alumni, employers, community members and our Board of Trustees engaged in a series of events, participated in opinion outreach efforts, and reviewed existing qualitative and quantitative data to develop a five-year Student Success Plan. The STCC 2015-2020 Student Success Plan was the first plan approved by the Massachusetts Board of Higher Education under its new campus-level strategic planning process. The Strategic Plan Steering Committee deployed questionnaires, brainstorming sessions, group interviews and strategizing sessions in which faculty, staff, students, alumni, trustees, and employers were asked about the College’s relative strengths and weaknesses and means to capitalize on or address them. The Committee received several hundred responses, and in conjunction with data presented in the section on Assessment, Retention, and Student Success, identified common themes to improve student success. These areas include: the urgency to address inequities in student achievement; the

With support from an Assessment Innovation Grant, two faculty members in the health sciences reviewed and revised the authentic assessments of their students’ affective and safety skills. With the improvements, students appreciated the specific feedback and the faculty found that they were able to offer corrective action earlier and more effectively.


necessity to reduce barriers around applying to and enrolling in the College; a demand for internal improvements, such as cross-departmental communication and better communication with students; and a desire—as stated by students—to make crucial events mandatory, such as New Student Orientation. The Strategic Plan Steering Committee also obtained feedback on the written plan from students who also participated in the development of an implementation plan. While we learned about the needs and aspirations of our students, faculty, staff and community, the most valuable lesson was the power of sharing our stories. Conversations centered on collecting data for goals and strategic actions led to more talks about teaching, learning, and service. We were inspired by this strategic planning process and resulting plan to expand on the conversations we have started. Integral to the plan’s success will be creating more opportunities for cross-campus conversations. These conversations are necessary for building a deeper commitment to our College’s mission of transforming the lives of our students as they aspire to academic and life-long successes. AREA OF EMPHASIS 2: Assuring the effectiveness of the institution’s internal governance, particularly in the areas of fiscal decision-making and planning, to promote communication and provide for appropriate participation of all constituencies. At the time of the 2010 NEASC Self Study, the College’s internal shared governance structure was in urgent need of revitalization. Since Fall 2013, the newly formed All-Unit Congress (AUC) has served as the model for the College's internal governance structure. Details of the AUC, including a draft of its constitution and by-laws were appended to the College's two-year report sent to NEASC in August 2013. The final version of the AUC Constitution and By-Laws are included in this interim report (Appendix G). As noted in its preamble, the new AUC “was formed to effectively represent the vast majority of those who work at Springfield Technical Community College: all full-time or part-time employees below the level of director, regardless of union status.” Two co-chairs, one representing faculty and one representing staff, are elected by the membership. Currently Dr. Brandon Poe, Biology Professor, and David Forton, Senior Academic Counselor in the Office of Disabilities Services, serve as co-chairs. A recording secretary is also elected. Dr. Poe will complete his term at the end of this academic year. His successor has already been elected and will begin his term in September 2016. The constitution of the AUC requires there be four standing committees all of which are active: the Coordinating Committee, Academic Affairs Standing Committee, Facilities and Safety Committee, and the Staff Standing Committee. Along with the AUC co-chairs, committee chairs are nominated and elected by the general membership of the All-Unit Congress. The charge, membership, and term limits for the AUC co-chairs and committee members are detailed in Appendix G. In addition, the AUC constitution allows for ad-hoc committees to be created to address specific problems as they emerge. This academic year, the Communications Committee and the Classroom Technology Committee were formed to address consistency in campus communication and maintenance of audio-visual and computer equipment in the classrooms, respectively. In an effort to ensure AUC representation and participation, committee seats are reserved for the members in several college-wide committees, including the Presidential Search Committee, the College’s Budget Committee, and the Student Success Council.


The AUC has been instrumental in bringing the opinions and needs of the campus community to the attention of the President, vice presidents, and the College’s Board of Trustees. In the two years since the August 2013 report, the AUC has worked with the President on several issues, for example, the re-structuring of the campus copy center hours which were reduced as a cost saving measure. Members of the AUC attend the STCC’s Board of Trustees monthly meetings to build a relationship with that body. In turn, the Board has invited the co-chairs of the AUC to attend its annual retreat. The leadership for the AUC is instrumental in working with the College’s President, serving an advisory role for their constituencies on campus. The AUC shows promise of being an effective form of representation on our campus; however, its activities were interrupted this academic year as faculty and staff members, who have worked without a contract since July 2015, began work-to-rule practices. As a consequence, assessment of the new shared governance model will now occur in Fall 2016. The AUC will survey its membership on the perceived efficacy and interview its leadership to identify policies/procedures that have been particularly effective and those that need improvement. Based on the outcomes of these assessments, the AUC will continue current policies/procedures found to be effective. Where areas of concern or need for improvement are identified, the AUC leadership/membership will make improvements and then re-survey the membership and re-interview the leadership in 2017 to determine if corrective actions were effective. AREA OF EMPHASIS 3: Reducing the deferred maintenance backlog and completing planned renovations.

Deferred maintenance continues to be an ongoing challenge for the College. Although it is the state’s responsibility to maintain the campus facilities, STCC has not received any planned deferred maintenance money from the Commonwealth from FY2013 to date. President Ira Rubenzahl, Vice President of Finance and Administration Joseph DaSilva and Senior Director of Facilities Maureen Socha have worked tirelessly advocating for the College, but the response has been minimal. In the past few years, there was a total of $252 million of statewide requests for deferred maintenance money and only $40 million was dispersed. Although it is clear that a planned and funded deferred maintenance project would be less costly and disruptive than responding to emergency failures, the College is left to address the problem. The College allots $3.15 million for facilities projects and deferred maintenance each year; however, it is not enough as documented in the 2011-2015 Sightlines benchmarking study. Requested of all community colleges by the Massachusetts Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance (DCAMM), the report noted that STCC has more “High Risk” space on campus than our peers (see illustration below). According to the report, in order to maintain the current condition of the campus, the College would need a minimum of $5.7 million dollars of annual stewardship; yet, even that amount will not address the deferred maintenance backlog that has accumulated from lack of Commonwealth funds.


Recent building and grounds emergencies, followed by subsequent unplanned requests for funding from DCAMM, are the consequences of long-term deferred maintenance. From FY2013 to FY2016, the College has had in excess of 16 emergencies requiring over $10.8 million of emergency funding. These emergencies include: condemnation of the central heating and cooling system due to multiple explosions, sinkholes stemming from a failure of the original water and sewer system, and complete failure of the underground power distribution system. All of the emergencies caused campus outages, delays and/or school cancelations. Although it is clear that a planned and funded deferred maintenance project would be less costly and disruptive, STCC has proceeded to address some of the issues itself. In order to prioritize problem areas, in 2014, the College engaged TRO Jung/Brannen to complete a MEP/F (Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Fire Protection) Infrastructure Master Plan. The plan identified both known and newly discovered concerns in the aging buildings and associated infrastructure, then prioritized them based on life-safety concerns as well as the risk of complete building shut down. They were then listed from Priority 0 to Priority 3, with the lower number indicating the projects that require more immediate attention. The costs to address all the problem areas are estimated to be in excess of $153 million. The chart below lists the costs associated for each level of priority.


Known Deferred Maintenance Needs as of September 2015

Total of Priority 0 (Immediate) $ 11,972,445 Total of Priority 1 (1-2 Years) $ 68,804,099 Total of Priority 2 (3-4 Years) $ 26,901,170 Total of Priority 3 (5-7 Years) $ 43,556,616 Multiple Projects with priority 0-3 under $50k each. $ 1,883,339 Total need known TODAY $ 153,117,669

The College completed the following deferred maintenance projects with the $3.1 million budgeted annually (additional projects are reviewed in Standard Eight):

• Buildings 2, 13, 17 Elevator modernizations • Buildings 2, 13, 17 and 20 duct cleaning • Fire alarm & system upgrades • Hot water tank replacements • Replacement of Lab air and vacuum systems • Replacement of the dental clinic vacuum system • Installation of a chemical storage venting system • Upgrade and replacement of doors and door hardware • Installing AHU smoke dampers • Abatement • Expansion of power distribution in Building 20

Over the next 5+ years, the College plans to use our budgeted $3.1 million to do the following:

• Begin a replacement program for the aged life-safety generators in Buildings 13, 17, 2 and 20 • Install a fire suppression system in Building 13 • Replace and upgrade the air handling systems in the academic buildings • Upgrade and replace underground infrastructure

One new project that will allow the College to address some deferred maintenance and infrastructure concerns is the renovation of Building 19 into the new “STCC Learning Commons” that includes:

• Replacement of water and sewer lines • Replacement of failed electrical gear and infrastructure in the building • Replacement of the water main from Pearl St to Building 19 • Addition of a new chilled water line

By moving most student service offices to Building 19, the project allows the College to vacate some obsolete 19th century buildings on campus. While the College intends to mothball these buildings, the Commonwealth is discussing a plan to fill the vacated buildings with other state entities and those this would require extensive renovations and upgrades. Building 20 which houses most of STCC’s health programs is the next building in line for major renovations. The building is being studied by DCAMM to “evaluate building envelope, structural and


hazardous materials deficiencies.” A team of engineers and architects led by Dietz & Company Architects is conducting the study. The team’s preliminary findings with four design options include:

1. Gut and renovate floors 1-3 with new mechanical and electrical systems keeping floors 4-5 as shell space. *Estimated Cost: $44 million

2. Horizontally phased renovations to include; renovating floors 4-5 for temporary occupancy by the current users; move occupants of floors 1-3 up to floors 4-5 to be able to gut and renovate 1-3; then relocate the occupants back to 1-3. *Estimated Cost:-$52 million

3. Remove floors 4 - 5; gut and renovate floors 1-3. Restore exterior to original 1941 design to the extent possible. * Estimated Cost: $38 million

4. Demolish and rebuild. *Estimated Costs: $73 million *Estimated costs do not include temporary relocation costs.

DCAMM is evaluating the options and the costs associated with these options. Clearly, each option has significant program and funding implications that need further vetting. In summary, the College is working diligently on identifying the total scope of deferred maintenance needs on campus, while planning to address the most urgent areas. It is the goal of the College to minimize any disruptions to students caused by emergency failures. The College will continue to fund projects locally to the best of its ability as well as continue to advocate for funding from the Commonwealth that will address these deferred maintenance projects. AREA OF EMPHASIS 4: Implementing distance education programming.

In 2011, the College filed for recognition of Substantive Change, reporting that nine academic programs could be completed by accumulating 50% of credits via online learning. The Commission acknowledged this Substantive Change in a May 29, 2012 letter. In August 2013, STCC submitted a progress report on its distance education programming that report was accepted on January 28, 2014 by the Commission. In that January 2014 letter, the Commission requested that distance education be included as an Area of Emphasis in the College's Interim Report. Since the time of our August 2013 report, the Finance associate’s degree closed, yielding a total of eight programs with 50% coursework possible online:

Liberal Arts/General Studies AS Liberal Arts Transfer AS Business Administration AS Business Administration – Accounting AS Business Administration – Management AS Engineering and Science Transfer AS Office Information Technologies AS (Medical Coding & Billing Option) Computer Information Technologies AS (IT Security Option)

Through April 2015, responsibilities for the development, assignment, and evaluation of online courses, as well as evening, summer, and weekend courses, were held by the Dean of the School of Continuing Education (SCE). In Spring 2015, a cross-department process improvement team re-assigned responsibility for online, evening, and weekend courses overseen by the Dean of SCE to the five academic deans, thereby dismantling SCE. Since Summer 2015, all responsibilities for online courses are held by the academic deans. At the time of the Spring 2015 reorganization, supervision of Blackboard®


and approval of courses remained the responsibility of the former Dean of SCE, who was re-assigned to the business office. By the end of January 2016, Blackboard® and the process to propose and assess online courses was moved to the Vice President of Academic Affairs. Currently, proposed online courses are reviewed with the assistance of the Quality Matters Program™. The review evaluates several standards such as the overall design (accessibility to course information and technology required); alignment of course activities to learning outcomes; assessment and instructional materials; instructor-student engagement; appropriateness of technology; availability of support (technical support, accessibility support, academic services support, and student services support) for students; and accessibility. Proposed online courses that do not meet the standards are not taught until revisions are made. Provisions for evaluating online faculty at STCC follow the Distance Education Agreement and subsequent memoranda of agreements with the Massachusetts Community College Council (MCCC). Under these agreements, forms have been designed and approved by appropriate parties that include a checklist for all course materials; a Distance Education Course Interaction Plan; evaluation of the instructor forms; and a process for “classroom” observation. Plans are underway to create a college-wide committee to oversee distance courses, particularly by developing policies and procedures for online course approval, and other policies not already defined by the memorandum of agreement with MCCC. In addition, professional development opportunities for current and future online faculty are being developed as a part of the Title III: Strengthening Institutions Program grant. The $2.1 million award includes funds for course re-design workshops that will focus on creating greater equity of outcomes among students of color and low-income students, including those who are taking online courses. In response to declining enrollment in traditional on-campus courses, the College is offering students courses at non-traditional times, including a four-week Winter Term of popular online courses. The College scheduled 110 exclusively online sections for Spring 2016 of which 78 are unique, including both lab sections and didactic classes. The College also offers hybrid courses in all semesters. The College will be moving toward offering a complete degree online; to that end, we will file a Substantive Change report to NEASC.

STANDARDS Standard One: Mission and Purposes

“Springfield Technical Community College supports students as they transform their lives.” Mission Statement: In Fall 2014, the Strategic Plan Steering Committee, co-chaired by Dean of Institutional Effectiveness, Dr. Barb Chalfonte and Dean of Engineering Technologies and Math, Dr. Adrienne Smith, designed and coordinated an inclusive, collaborative planning process that included multiple opportunities in multiple formats for stakeholder participation. While this planning process is discussed in more detail in Area of Emphasis 1 and Standard Two, the collaborative process was also used to identify a new mission statement for the College that can be seen above. Capturing the mission of any community college today is a formidable task as the work of these institutions has become increasingly complex. Consider some aspects of the mission:


• Providing higher education to students from the diverse region and communities; • Retraining workers to meet the needs of local employers; • Helping students acquire academic skills that may not have been addressed in their

primary and secondary education; • Supporting students as they develop the skills to become productive citizens.

To revise the mission statement for the College, the Strategic Plan Steering Committee collected stories of student success from faculty, staff, and students. From each story, the group identified phrases that captured STCC’s purpose, actions, and impact. Although the work at the College was clearly complex and came in many forms, the frequently-cited phrases and themes were surprisingly consistent and clear: “Springfield Technical Community College supports students as they transform their lives.” After approval by the STCC Board of Trustees in May 2015 and the Board of Higher Education in June 2015, this new mission statement was introduced to faculty and staff at their respective Professional Development Days in Fall 2015. The new statement is featured on posters distributed campus wide, where the mission statement has been translated into the top five languages spoken by STCC students—Arabic, Polish, Russian, Spanish, Vietnamese. Workforce Development: One of the ways in which STCC continues to transform lives is through workforce development programs. Led by Vice President of Foundation and Workforce Development Robert LePage and in collaboration with Holyoke Community College, STCC established TWO – Training & Workforce Options – to meet the needs of local employers. According to the STCC TWO website, the collaboration allows experts and consultants to design programs geared toward employers’ needs. As of Fall 2015, over 500 individuals have been trained by STCC through this partnership. In December 2015, MGM Resorts International broke ground to build a proposed 759,157 square-foot casino in the South End neighborhood of Springfield. Two years earlier, city residents voted resoundingly in favor of this project, located approximately 1.5 miles from the STCC campus. Casino supporters expect there to be a significant positive workforce implication for the region, with MGM promising 3,000 casino jobs and 2,000 construction jobs. Both STCC and HCC, through TWO, will collaborate with MGM to create training programs, with STCC focused on licensed gaming occupations, such as dealers, table games, slot machine technicians, and surveillance. We anticipate the training programs will begin in FY2017 and serve up to 1000 people. In addition, TWO is preparing to address current and backfill workforce needs by developing short-term vocational training programs for positions in customer service, culinary arts, hospitality management, healthcare, and manufacturing. Several of these vocational programs include stackable credentials, allowing individuals to accumulate credentials that can be applied towards an associate’s degree at either STCC or HCC. Further, STCC improved the workforce pipeline by significantly increasing capacity in ABE (Adult Basic Education) and ELL (English Language Learner) programs and launching a new Workforce Readiness Certificate in response to long waitlists for the ABE/ELL programs and high employer demand. With the support of several Department of Labor Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training (TAACCCT) Grants, five non-credit programs were created: Call Center/Customer Service, Manufacturing Production Technician, Home Health Aide, CNA+, and Community Health

http://www.stcc.edu/wd/two/


Worker/Behavior Technician. As of August 2015, 196 individuals have trained in these new programs in response to regional employer recommendations. Through the statewide Department of Labor GP-STEM grant, accelerated, block-scheduled, college credit programs are being developed. In Fall 2015, a 10-week certificate in customer service was piloted with nine students. Student evaluations offered valuable feedback on all aspects of the program, and the recommendations will be incorporated for the second program cohort which begins in March 2016. For Fall 2016, another cohort will begin an accelerated credit certificate program in web security. The GP-STEM grant has also provided the opportunity for STCC to being work with the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning (CAEL) in collaboration with the other 14 public community colleges to establish processes for conversion of experiential learning to college credit. Community Support: To further serve the local community and improve student access and success, the College supports several initiatives. First, the Workforce Development Office has aligned the curricula between non-credit English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) and developmental ESL courses improving access to these programs. Second, with support of the Bill and Melinda Gates Fund, Gateway to College provides a high school alternative for secondary-level students who are behind on high-school credits for their age. Students from Springfield Public Schools and area districts take developmental and college-level coursework that they can also apply to high school degree. Since the program’s inception in Fall 2013, 125 students have started the program and 18 have graduated from it. The fall-to-spring retention has been 77.2% for the first 2013FA cohort and 83.3% for the second 2014FA cohort. The fall-to-fall retention has been 38.6% for the first cohort and improved to 67.3% for the second cohort. Eleven students (61.1%) who have graduated from STCC’s Gateway to College program have either enrolled at STCC or have a pending application. Third, funded by a state grant, the STEM Starter Academy summer bridge program’s aim is to increase the number of underrepresented students taking courses in STEM. This is accomplished by providing a jumpstart to incoming students’ first semester on campus. In addition to classes, students receive tutoring and coaching as well as take field trips, attend events by guest speakers, and experience hands-on science activities. Since 2014, 53 students participated; 79% of them are still at the College in AS degree programs. Recruitment for the third cohort is now underway. As these programs demonstrate, STCC is committed to the many aspects of its mission, including workforce development, aligning non-credit with credit programs to improve access, and supporting public school students with high-quality education alternatives, all while practicing its mission to transform students’ lives.

Standard Two: Planning and Evaluation

Strategic Planning Process: As discussed in Area of Emphasis 1 and Standard One, a cross-campus committee of faculty, staff, and administrators was formed in Fall 2014 and charged with designing a strategic planning process that was inclusive of all the STCC campus stakeholders including community members, to draft a student success plan (SSP) that would guide the College for next five years.


Subsequent to the development of the SSP, an implementation team gathered to identify the most pressing concerns and create a blue-print for significant improvement over the next three years. The concerns that the College is currently focused on include:

1. Lack of effective communication with students diminishes their ability to succeed. 2. Need to increase race/ethnicity inequity in STCC's 3-year graduation rates. 3. Need for more understanding among new and prospective students about “how college works.” 4. Low graduation rate among those students with developmental placements. 5. Need to increase the number of students who complete their courses successfully.

To address these issues, STCC will take actions including: Developing an FYI desk by students for students (Issues 1, 3, 5); revising New Student Orientation, offering it earlier and more frequently, including Spanish language options, and making it mandatory (Issues 1-5); developing academic pathways that incorporate successful developmental initiatives (Issues 2, 4, 5); and supporting faculty and staff improvement efforts in culturally-responsive pedagogy and service provision (Issues 2-5). As a result of these actions, we expect improvement in graduation and persistence rates, course completion rates, and a reduction in the race/ethnicity and college readiness-based inequities in these rates. One difference between this strategic plan and previous ones are the mechanisms for implementation and oversight. As mentioned in Area of Emphasis 1, the Student Success Council will serve as an oversight group for these SSP-related actions and measures. Leaders of the actions and initiatives will provide regular reports to the SSC and the SSC will receive updates on outcome measures. When leaders encounter roadblocks or want to share successes, the SSC will provide colleague with whom to collaborate and celebrate. Likewise, when the SSC notes changes in outcome measures, the group members can offer recommendations when goals are not met or provide continued support when improvement is achieved. Assessment and Evaluation: Over the last few years, the College has developed and improved processes for institutional-wide assessment, program-level assessment, and student and employer feedback, along with mechanisms for gathering results and communicating them to the college community. To this end, the Office of Institutional Effectiveness (IE) was established in January 2012. This office includes the Dean of IE, Director of IR, Director of Assessment, and a Director of Learning Engagement and Advancement (added in 2015). Details about the work done by IE are included in Area of Emphasis 1. With the SSP and Implementation Plan, the College is prioritizing the concerns identified by members of the greater STCC community and integrating recommendations into department goals. Regular progress reviews are presented at the Student Success Council and at the monthly Vice Presidents Meetings. In addition, the College has already (e.g., Title III) and continues (e.g., HSI-STEM) to seek grants to support the goals of the SSP.

Standard Three: Organization and Governance

The Organization of the College has experienced significant changes in the five years since the 2010 Self Study articulated as follows: Board of Trustees: In 2012, the legislature of the Commonwealth granted the Governor the power to appoint the Chair of the Board of Trustees for public colleges and universities. The STCC Board has seen the retirement of two chairs with the Governor’s appointment of their replacements over the past five


years. Since June 2015, three board members have also been replaced with new appointees. The term for five other board members, including the Student Trustee, will expire later in 2016; whether these current members will have their appointments renewed has not yet been determined. A full list of the board members, the dates of their terms, contact information, and committee assignments is found in Appendix H. Administration: Through retirements and reorganizations, the administration of the College has undergone changes since our last NEASC self-study. The College’s current organizational chart shows the reporting structure in Appendix I. The personnel changes among the senior administration led to shifting reporting lines for several departments. In August 2015, the former Dean of the School of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences, Dr. Arlene Rodriguez, was selected as Vice President of Academic Affairs/Chief Academic Officer (CAO) after a nationwide search. In March 2016, Dean of Student Success and Access, Kamari Collins, was named Vice President of Student and Multicultural Affairs/Chief Student Affairs Officer (CSAO) after a nationwide search. Lastly, the Dean of Curriculum, who reported to the CAO, has been named Dean of Enrollment Management and now reports to the CSAO. In September 2015, President Ira Rubenzahl announced his retirement effective June 2016. In December 2015, ACCT Executive Search Services was hired to assist in the search. Following the requirements outlined by the Massachusetts Board of Higher Education (DHE), a search committee has been formed which includes the two collective bargaining groups of the College, non-unit personnel, members of the Board of Trustees, student representation, and a Department of Higher Education staff member appointed by that department's commissioner. These administrative changes will impact the College and its future, but the College seeks to preserve continuity in its culture and to maintain its commitment to its core mission. The full effects of these changes will be reviewed in the 2020 Self-Study report for NEASC. Internal Shared Governance: The new model for shared governance, the All-Unit Congress (AUC), was ratified in Fall 2013. Additional details about the AUC are found in Area of Emphasis 2.

Standard Four: The Academic Program

As noted in the Standard Four data first forms, student enrollment in degree programs at the College has consistently declined in the past three years, with certificate programs following a similar pattern. Improved employment opportunities for our students contribute to the decline, reflecting the countercyclical nature of community college enrollment: enrollment increases in a weak economy as individuals pursue credentials that will help them find a job. As the economy improves and jobs become more plentiful, enrollment declines. In response to changing student and regional employer needs, additions have been made to academic offerings since our last NEASC self-study. Three new associate’s degree programs have been approved by the DHE: Project Management, Health Information Technologies, and Architecture and Building Technologies. In addition, an accelerated Customer Service certificate of completion has been piloted with positive evaluations from participating students and their employers; an accelerated certificate of completion in web security has been proposed, with the first cohort to be accepted for an October 2016 start. This second accelerated program will be offered exclusively in the evenings. Based on limited regional employment opportunities and subsequent low enrollment, two associate’s degree programs were closed: the finance degree and the massage therapy degree.


Resource Allocation and Pursuit of External Funding: The academic budget process was revised in 2014 to provide greater input from program chairs and academic deans. In addition to beginning the budgetary process earlier, recurring expenditures have been annualized; previous budgets required directors to re-write budgets to include these expenditures. The new practice allows budget managers to better prepare for new expenses. Grants continue to be an outside source of income. The Office of Grants scans local, regional and national resources, notifying appropriate departments when a potential call for proposals is found. Additional information about the pursuit of grants and the role of faculty in them is included in Standard Five. Program review process: As outlined in Area of Emphasis 1, the College established the Department of Institutional Effectiveness to support college-wide efforts to collect and analyze performance-related information and help faculty and staff understand and act on data. All degree-granting programs with external accreditation must undergo a regular program review to remain accredited; the SOAR process (see Area of Emphasis 1) supports student learning outcomes review for all programs and departments. A more detailed discussion of assessment methods used at the College, including those used to assess institution-wide core competencies (previously, general education) and programs without external accreditation including process outcomes and subsequent actions are found in Area of Emphasis 1 and the essay on Assessment, Retention, and Student Success. Developmental Education: Working in conjunction with the other Massachusetts community colleges and with the assistance of the DHE, STCC continues to explore ways to improve student success by more quickly moving students through developmental- and into college-level coursework. As noted in Standard Two, developmental placements are a significant barrier to student success. In order to better support our students, several initiatives been established and are showing positive results. For math, free two-hour Accuplacer review sessions are available to incoming students before they take the exam. Analysis of this initiative shows that placements into pre-algebra are reduced by 5% with students placing higher in the developmental math sequence. Incoming students are also offered access to a commercial math review website (for a $20 fee, which encourages engagement) followed by an opportunity to retake the placement test. The MyMathTest initiative was started in 2013 and 303 students have used the site to date. Of those using the site, 54% returned to retake the placement test and 73% of these improved at least one level in math placement. Outcomes in subsequent math courses were identical for the 77 students who improved a level through this initiative as those originally placed into the same level. In short, students in the initiative accelerated their progression through the math requirements without any detriment to their course outcomes. Based on the success of this initiative, more students are being directed to it by advisors. In addition, the College offers 5-day developmental math classes which doubles in-class time for students. In Spring 2016, the College offered 10% of developmental math courses in this format. Students in these courses show modest gains in both course completion and college retention. As importantly, the 5-day courses provide an alternative placement for some students. Students who place high within a particular developmental level are allowed to place one level higher if they move to an extended-time section. Students taking this option reduce their developmental sequence by a semester, maintain their course success rates, and demonstrate improved college retention rates.


While this is a successful initiative, the faculty resources needed to double class time and the size of the targeted student population means that this initiative will not be scaled up further. It meets the College’s needs in its current configuration. In coordination with the DHE, STCC is conducting a pilot study to determine if a student’s high school GPA can be used in lieu of the Accuplacer to place students into their mathematics courses. At other community colleges, the pilot proved to be successful in that more students placed into higher-level math courses (upper-levels of developmental or even college-level math). The STCC developmental math faculty were concerned about using high school GPA’s to place students and added criteria beyond those recommended by DHE for students to participate in the pilot; as a result, few students were eligible and the pilot at STCC was too small to be conclusive. STCC plans to continue the placement pilot work for students entering in Fall 2017 by modifying the participation criteria to align with that of other community colleges. Lastly, based on an analysis of student course outcomes by the math faculty, the pre-requisite for college-level Statistics has been changed from Algebra II to Algebra I. Students are thus able to complete this college-level math course after completing two levels of developmental math at most.

As seen in FIGURE 1 below, the combination of these initiatives has helped greater proportions of students complete their developmental math requirements within two years. In 2008, 20% of STCC students completed their developmental math courses in two years, a rate below the mean proportion for the colleges comprising the Achieving the Dream network. In 2012, 30% of students with developmental needs now complete their coursework within two years, outpacing the ATD network benchmark.

FIGURE 1: Proportion of students placed into developmental mathematics who complete their required sequence

within two years. STCC performance is compared to (a) Colleges entering the ATD network in the same year as STCC and (b) every College in the ATD network.

To improve developmental English outcomes, the College adopted an accelerated learning model, Open English, in which students complete developmental writing as a co-requisite for a college-level English course. In Fall 2014, 85% of students in this initiative passed their co-requisite Composition I course. In contrast, only 31% of students in a control group who took developmental writing alone went on to pass Composition I the following Spring. Another 18% either failed or withdrew, and the remainder either did not enroll in Composition I or did not return to the college in the Spring. Outcomes for


this initiative showed similar success in prior years. In Spring 2016, the College will offer 18% of developmental writing courses in this format. Overall, as seen in FIGURE 2 below, this initiative, accompanied by review sessions prior to the Accuplacer test for English, has helped greater proportions of students complete their developmental English requirements within two years. The proportion of STCC students completing developmental English has always been higher than the ATD network benchmark, but has continued to improve. Based on these outcomes, the College is increasing the number of Open English developmental/college-level English co-requisite courses as well as making pre-placement English review sessions mandatory.

FIGURE 2: Proportion of students placed into developmental English who complete their required sequence within two years. STCC performance is compared to (a) Colleges entering the ATD network in the same year as STCC and

(b) every College in the ATD network. Effectiveness and Value of Liberal Arts/General Studies Degree: Preliminary data on employment after college provided by the DHE in 2015 show that the STCC Liberal Arts/General Studies (LTGS) degree ranks among the top five programs at the College in terms of earnings by graduates one year after graduation (median income = $28,837). The employment rate for these graduates was 64%. These data indicate the value of the degree to graduates, but are also specific for graduates employed by Massachusetts employers (excluding federal, self-employed, military and out of state). On the annual survey of graduating STCC students, students are asked how well their education at the College has prepared them for a chosen career or discipline. In 2013, 96% of those surveyed said they felt “somewhat or very well prepared” and by 2015, that percentage increased to 100%. These data show a high rate of satisfaction among STCC graduates, including LTGS students, while the DHE data confirm that LTGS graduates are finding employment at good salaries. Based on the large proportion of students who (a) enter the College without the necessary prerequisites to enter an allied health program, or (b) apply to a health program, but are not accepted to it, the College is developing a new Health Sciences Transfer associate’s degree that will improve career advising and readiness for this student cohort. This program will emphasize work readiness, extensive hands-on learning in the College's SIMS Medical Center, and the creation of personal education plans. Expected enrollment is over 500 students based on the number of students currently in the pre-health core of the College’s LTGS program. The program launch is planned for Fall 2017, dependent on the DHE approval timeline.


In addition, a pilot guided pathways/meta-majors program will be launched in Fall 2017 for students in the Pre-Science and Engineering Transfer Core of General Studies (approx. 110 students) to help connect them to an appropriate transfer pathway to four-year colleges and universities. Based on the literature, connecting students to their transfer pathway prior to their admission to the program is expected to improve retention in this program. Lastly, the College Now program (Dual Enrollment) allows area students to take one free college-level course per semester at STCC while completing their high school requirements. Eligible high school juniors and seniors can take up to eight free classes at STCC. In FY2015, 265 high school students were enrolled in College Now (Dual Enrollment) courses. Of those students, 57 (22%) subsequently enrolled in matriculated programs at STCC in the Fall Semester of 2015. Another 10 (4%) continued at STCC as non-matriculated students. Distance/Online Education: Information about the College's distance/online education program is available in Area of Emphasis 4.

Standard Five: Faculty

Since the August 2013 NEASC update, the College has implemented practices to address appraisal findings from the 2010 Self-Study for NEASC, while developing newer strategies to support ongoing initiatives. Goal for faculty and staff to mirror student demographics: Throughout his tenure, President Rubenzahl has championed the goal of hiring diverse faculty and staff to more closely mirror the demographics our students. Since 2010, the College has hired several faculty and staff from under-represented groups, however, the goal of mirroring the student body demographics requires a rigorous plan.

Full-time Faculty and Student Race and Ethnicity Demographics

Hispanic Black White Other

Full-time Faculty 1.4% 5.0% 90.1% 3.5%

Students 26.2% 15.7% 51.5% 6.6% The College has revised the hiring process to attract a more diverse pool of candidates, particularly in searches for faculty position. For example, postings are placed on websites and in other publications that market to a diverse population. Moreover, President Rubenzahl requires and a newly-created hiring guide formalizes the practice that all search committees include members of different races, ethnicities, and genders. The guide outlines the requirements for a diverse hiring committee, inclusive application pool, and relevant interview questions. Failure to comply in any of these areas closes the search process. In addition, as noted in Standard Eleven, the Office of Human Resources is revising the College’s Affirmative Action Plan. This plan, along with the hiring guide, reinforces the College’s commitment to a hiring process that is diverse and inclusive. Despite these efforts, the College still faces several challenges to hiring a diverse faculty. STCC is not the only college that has set as a goal diversifying full-time faculty. With salary restrictions, the College cannot be as competitive as private sectors or universities. For example, a Latina candidate was a


finalist, this past summer, for a full-time teaching position in the Energy Systems department; she withdrew her application because she was offered a higher salary from a private sector employer. The College faces this and other challenges with many prospective faculty of color, as well as prospective candidates for teaching positions in the allied health and STEM fields. Retaining faculty and staff from diverse populations and attending to their inclusion in the campus community once they are hired is a current focus. Two groups at STCC with these goals are the Black Professionals Group (BPG) and the Hispanic Association of Higher Education (HAHE). The mission of each group is to help faculty and staff of color develop a mentoring and support network for each other and students of color; provide a social cohort for new faculty and staff who may find themselves the only person of color in their department; fundraise for student scholarships; and serve as resources on matters of diversity and inclusion at the College. The Diversity Council was founded shortly after President Rubenzahl’s arrival in 2003 and continues to have an important presence on campus. Comprised of 26 faculty and staff members, the Council’s mission, found here, is “to ensure that everyone at STCC has a voice.” Full-time and Adjunct Faculty: Hiring full-time faculty has been a priority, however, steady reductions in state funding limits the College to replacing full-time faculty as they retire or leave. Despite the continued reduction in state support, the College has maintained an excellent student/faculty ratio: in Fall 2014, the ratio was 16 to 1 with 4264 FTE students and 263 FTE faculty; in Fall 2015, that ratio was 15 to 1 with 3905 FTE students and 252 FTE faculty. Maintaining class sizes that support student learning remains a priority. As seen in the Standard 5 data first form, the number of full-time faculty remains stable, with the fewest in FY2015 (141), a year when the College offered an early retirement package to senior faculty to offset state budget cuts and a projected decline in enrollment. Faculty positions that otherwise opened in FY2015 were not replaced and future replacements are dependent on funding and enrollment. One faculty member’s retirement accompanied the closing of a program. STCC's dependence on adjunct faculty has steadily decreased since FY2013, as shown in the Standard 5 data first form. This trend is due to student enrollment that is declining. No matter the hiring trend, the College recognizes its responsibility to include adjunct faculty in college life. In addition to being invited to attend all department, division, and college-wide meetings, adjunct faculty are compensated with a stipend for attending campus professional development activities, workshops, as well as meetings organized by DHE. To fund these stipends, the current practice is to piece together money from different accounts, but some are advocating for a budget line in FY2017 to specifically support regular and ongoing adjunct faculty professional development and college community participation. The College offers a semester-long orientation seminar for all new full-time faculty. To ensure their participation, the seminar is credited as part of their workload. Beginning Fall 2016, the Director of Learning Engagement and Advancement, who organizes all professional development programs for faculty and professional staff, will design and lead the seminar, improving the content based on evaluations and need assessments. Efforts to include and compensate adjunct faculty in similar long-term professional development activities are being developed. Increased interest in grant pursuit: Faculty participation in grants as project leaders has played a large role in creating successful grant initiatives. In 2015, the College was awarded over $950,000 MLSC equipment grant that will fund a new program in Bio-Medical technician and an S-STEM Grant from the

http://www.stcc.edu/diversity/mission.asp


National Science Foundation for two years of full scholarships for up to 70 students in Computer Information Technology. Both these grants were led by faculty; in fact, grants that provide needed funding for teaching and student learning initiatives are written with faculty support. Faculty are always called to design the projects of a grant related to teaching and their work is compensated through that grant. Additional steps have been taken to increase faculty interest in grants. Grants Office staff now present at the New Hire Orientation for staff and the New Faculty seminar. Recently proposed changes in the staffing of the Grants office calls for the creation of a position that would focus entirely on outreach to faculty and staff, providing guidance on grant research, writing, and management with workshops. Sabbaticals: For the past several years, STCC has awarded sabbaticals—both half- and full-year--to eligible full-time faculty. With ongoing uncertainty about state funding, the College has delayed approval of sabbaticals this academic year.

Standard Six: Students

The College has been strategically involved with a number of initiatives to support the success of students. These strategies become more vital as enrollment decreases; in addition, more of those who do attend STCC, do so as part-time students. This trend is clearly seen in the Standard Six data first form, which shows a drop in enrollment between Fall 2013 and Fall 2014, with a significant 9.5% decline in student FTE for degree-seeking students between Fall 2014 and Fall 2015. Using the data listed in these forms, the College forecasts a 6% drop in student FTE for Fall 2016. Scaled-up initiatives: Over the last several years, College resources have been used to scale up the three successful ATD-related initiatives: Intrusive Advising, College Success Seminar, and 5-day Developmental Math courses (the last described in Standard Four). As of Fall 2014, sections of College Success Seminar, focused on core competency skills needed in the classroom and the workforce, have doubled since 2007 and now include contextualized sections for health, business, and ESL. In November 2012, two additional part-time intrusive academic advisors were hired through a state-based Performance Incentive Fund (PIF). Intrusive Advisors provide proactive advising services to over 500 students in the Liberal Arts/General Studies programs who have at least one developmental placement. Additional professional advisors, as well as TRiO advisors, serve students on a walk-in basis, as well as meet with students that take courses online, on weekends, and in the evening, with more than 1,000 student contacts made. The scaling of these initiatives were based on analysis of data demonstrating improved retention and course outcomes for students in them, particularly those students receiving Intrusive Advising while taking the College Success Seminar. Based on the success of Intrusive Advising, faculty members developed a plan, Advising Is Teaching, to offer recommendations for professional development for faculty advisors to implement some of the successful advising techniques. As a part of our Title III grant, we will be implementing these recommendations. Expand the use of online social media and social networking tools in recruitment and community outreach: The College has added a series of online social media tools to enhance outreach and recruitment efforts. The Admissions Office debuted the use of customer relationship management (CRM) software called EnrollmentRx in Spring 2015. This tool has streamlined our admissions process as a whole and greatly improved the quality and speed of communication with prospective students.


Social media (Twitter/Facebook/YouTube/Point Across videos) is a key outreach tool used in conjunction with texting to quickly communicate with prospective students. These means of connection aid staff and potential students with the completion of the admissions application, answering inquires, broadcasting campus initiatives (FAFSA workshops, career seminars, campus events, important deadline dates), and provide an easy platform for the exchange of information.

Online Tools for Students

College Application http://www.stcc.edu/admissions/applynow.asp Twitter https://twitter.com/S_T_C_C

Facebook https://www.facebook.com/SpringfieldTechnicalCommunityCollege/

YouTube https://www.youtube.com/user/SpringfieldTechCC

Point Across http://www.stcc.edu/finaid/disbursements.asp Engage students as a retention strategy: Through a state-supported PIF grant, the College purchased a web-portal to provide easier online access to services and academic information for students. Efforts are now underway to engage and train students in the use of the portal. The Academic Advising Department, along with other student service and enrollment offices, also use texting and robocalls as key outreach tools to increase retention by sending reminders of advising appointments, registration, and financial aid/payment deadlines, student support services initiatives, and additional campus-wide services. The RAVE Alert system conveniently notifies students by text and/or email of weather-related and other campus closures. Implement initiatives that address student academic and support needs: Two new initiatives funded by the College provide expanded support services for students. The Center for Access Services & Single Stop assists students applying to all financial resources for which they qualify. Opened during the 2014-2015 academic year, the Center assisted 348 students. In addition, VITA (Volunteer Income Tax Assistance) assists students filing income tax returns and helps them maximize their returns to support their college expenses. Over the last academic year, 525 people (138 students, 387 non-student community members) were assisted by VITA compared to 103 people (35 students, 85 non-student community members) the previous year. As noted throughout this report, the Student Success Plan will be the guide for improving student success outcomes for the next five years. The College is currently in the design phase of a new Student Learning Commons/Enrollment Center in Building 19. More information about the center can be found throughout the report, including Standard Seven and Standard Eight. Increase student social space: Over the last few years, the College built WIFI lounges in Buildings 13, 17, and 20 as well as student lounge spaces in Building 16 including one near the Gateway to College program (see Standard One for information on this program). In addition, the second floor of Building 27 was renovated to include student lounge and work space. The campus Fitness Center was renovated and expanded, and a gazebo with seating was built outside of Building 2. Student café areas in Buildings 2 and 16 have been renovated to include MTVU TV monitors and lounge space. Increase the effectiveness of financial aid processing: The College’s Financial Aid office has adopted automated award packaging. New processes, including streamlined Satisfactory Academic Progress (SAP) processing, have resulted in faster notification of student's SAP status and the elimination of

https://twitter.com/S_T_C_C

http://www.stcc.edu/finaid/disbursements.asp


financial aid deferments. Improved organization of financial aid filing (now electronic) and the re-organization of work duties of Financial Aid office staff have eliminated duplication of efforts freeing up staff to have more time with students. As a result of these changes, more FAFSAs are completed on time and more students are awarded their financial aid earlier than in past years. In 2010, 2,350 students filed their FAFSA by May 1; in 2014, 3,183 students filed by May 1. In 2010, 1,424 students were awarded financial aid packages by August 1; in 2014, 3,404 students received awards by August 1.

Standard Seven: Library and Other Information Resources

The library and other student-serving offices will move to Building 19 which will be converted into a student center and learning commons by late 2017. The Dean of Library Services and the library staff have been active in the design plans for the new library space, working directly with the selected architectural firm, Anna Beha. A preliminary plan for the proposed space can be seen below in FIGURE 3. In preparation for the move, the library has deaccessioned thousands of items, donating them to an organization that distributes the books to national and international charities. With a more streamlined collection, space was created in the current library for students to use for group work, tutoring, and studying anticipating the design for the new library/learning commons space proposed for Building 19. Part of this space was re-allocated for the creation of an IT help desk, a resource for students who use the library’s computer lab.

FIGURE 3: Proposed floor plan for Library in Building 19 redesign.

Reference librarians collaborate with faculty and Institutional Effectiveness staff to integrate and assess information literacy as a part of the College’s core competencies. Assessment of institution-, program-, and course-level outcomes that include information literacy inform the research courses offered by the library, as well as the library workshops provided to students and faculty.


As the library prepares to move, the staff have made strides in digitizing the College’s archival collections and investing in more relevant—and sometimes more expensive—databases, by sharing costs with several departments. Expensive databases such as MEDCOM, a streaming nursing/allied health video collection, and Elsevier’s Science Direct are valuable resources for faculty and students and are paid for by the library and the associated academic divisions. A shared electronic repository for historical and academic content is being discussed by MCCLPHEI (Massachusetts Commonwealth Consortium of Libraries in Public Higher Education Institutions), reflecting the ongoing trend towards collaboration in order to meet the expensive costs of valuable resources. The STCC Library is also a readily accessible resource that provides several options for students (and the public) to research virtually any topic. Computers are available to students in the Library and across campus and staff are available to assist students. The Library also offers access to several databases students can access for free. Internet access is reasonably open to allow students access to the information they need. Distance Education: A report on distance education and online learning at the College is found in Area of Emphasis 4. Information Technology: The IT department supports the entire campus, providing the hardware, software, and maintenance in the areas of academic and administrative computing. It also maintains the unified communication systems used on campus. Appropriate use of IT resources and services is governed by College policy found on the College’s website. Since 2012, funds have been set aside to install and upgrade classroom technology in each of the academic buildings. Overseen by the Dean of the School of Business and Information Technology (SBIT), most of the classrooms have standard equipment for faculty: a document camera, overhead projector or flat screen monitor (the size of the classroom determining which is installed), ceiling speakers, and a podium with electrical outlets and cables to connect a laptop. A part-time staff person responds exclusively to classroom technology concerns via a dedicated extension on the help desk phone-line. Based on the findings of a needs-assessment survey conducted in 2013, IT introduced an intranet portal platform, STCCNET, to the campus community. Accessed from the College’s website, it facilitates communication and collaboration across the campus. STCCNET is being upgraded to be more responsive to student-owned technology and to improve single sign-on capabilities. Students will then need only one username and password to access all web-based tools required of them. STCC uses its ERP and reporting systems for planning, evaluating programs, and making modifications to services and initiatives to better suit the student population. As a data-informed organization, STCC utilizes data from resources such as the ERP system to identify what is and is not working for particular initiatives. This information is used to modify curricula and services to improve student outcomes.

Standard Eight: Physical and Technological Resources

Physical Resources: Despite the difficulties with deferred maintenance, the College has leveraged its own resources to renovated existing buildings and areas to keep them functional and aesthetically pleasing. As noted in Area of Emphasis 3, the College commits $3.1 million annually for capital and


deferred maintenance projects. Although that amount is not enough to complete all projects, it does allow the College to proceed with the more urgent instructional and support physical resource needs of our students. According to the December 2013 survey by Rickes Associates, Inc.,

Roughly 40% of all assignable space at STCC is instructional classroom and laboratory use reflecting the College’s commitments to hands-on instruction. Meanwhile, just under 18% of the campus space is dedicated to faculty and staff offices. Together these two program areas represent over half of the institutional space on the STCC campus.

Using the Sightlines report discussed in Area of Emphasis 3, a five-year Facilities Capital Spending Plan was created and approved by the STCC Board of Trustees’ Ways and Means Committee. This report is adjusted throughout the year to address newly urgent needs. During the past five years, the College has funded several capital projects that support faculty and staff needs and safety. Recent examples of these projects include:

• WIFI lounges created in four academic buildings to give students a quiet and comfortable place to study in between classes and to charge their electronic devices on the free charging stations.

• New fitness center built in Building 2 for student, faculty, and staff use. • Gender neutral restrooms constructed or designated in Buildings 2, 13, 17 and 27. • Exterior gazebo near shuttle stop to provide shelter for students, as well as a space to socialize. • Improvements to sidewalks and roads on and around the campus with an emphasis on

separating pedestrian and vehicular traffic. • Installation of emergency blue lights and surveillance camera systems around the campus.

All upgrades, installations, and repairs are done in accordance with state and federal laws. The Department of Public Safety’s Building and Plumbing Inspectors, as well as the City of Springfield Electrical and Fire Department Inspectors, all have jurisdiction and inspection oversight of work done at STCC. An aging infrastructure places stress on human resources, as well as fiscal resources. Operationally, the College has reorganized facilities staff to meet the increasing daily demands of the aging buildings. The new School Dude work order system has proved helpful in tracking, organizing, and prioritizing work demands. A recent customer service survey conducted by Sightlines concluded that “76% of customers have experienced improvement in the services by the facilities department.” Our current focus is addressing the energy efficiency of our building systems to maximize energy savings. The College is in the process of working with utilities companies on numerous incentive programs to curb the cost of making needed repairs. This initiative began in 2014 when DCAMM completed the upgrade and decentralization of our central heating and cooling plant. Our campus was the first to participate in the DCAMM-sponsored accelerated energy program to increase efficiency and decrease environmental impact. As a part of this program, STCC installed all new boilers and chillers, although our building systems have remained the same. Technology Resources: Since 2010, classroom space and technology have undergone major upgrades. As noted in Standard Seven, these improvements, overseen by the Dean of the School of Business and Information Technology, include a refresh of faculty computers, projectors, document cameras, A/V controllers, and upgrade of the finishes, furniture, and supporting electrical infrastructure. The


classroom system is standardized so all classroom podiums have identical equipment and upgrades are done on a four-year cycle. Computer labs are being upgraded to our new Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) system. Lab computers are being replaced with zero footprint terminals that can be centrally managed. A refresh of computer lab Ethernet wiring and networking is also underway. The refreshed labs will contain all CAT6 wiring and 1GB connections to the network core. Information Technology (IT) regularly revisits technological resources to determine how technology can better fit the environment. Over the summer of 2015, IT rolled out 100 virtual desktop stations for student use in the Student Success Center, the library, and tutoring cubicles. These stations replaced aged computers improving computing performance significantly. STCC has a full set of IT policies that define how technology resources and data are to be handled by students and staff. Regarding the network and infrastructure, these policies define acceptable use of wireless and wired networks by students and staff. STCC recently invested in updating hardware and software to failsafe applications using server virtualization, system replication, and upgrading backup systems. End-of-life firewalls were replaced with the next generation seven-layer firewall system that provides new features such as port security, intrusion protection and data loss protection. Monitoring and logging is enabled to track and identify any misuse of technology systems. All users are granted access to only the resources they require. STCC is committed to providing an atmosphere conducive to study and research. The recent addition of the WIFI lounges is one example of the commitment. Over the last five years, $1.4 million has been used to expand bandwidth and the wireless environment of the entire campus.

Standard Nine: Financial Resources

STCC has ensured that its finances have remained stable to support its mission despite fluctuating state support. The College has three main sources of funding:

1. student fees for credit and non-credit courses; 2. state support which includes all appropriated state funds and capital equipment, deferred

maintenance, and infrastructure funds; and 3. other income (bookstore commissions, investment income, Auxiliary income, and/or training

contract revenue, grants, gifts).

Additionally, Springfield Technical Community College Assistance Corporation (STCCAC), and Springfield Technical Community College Foundation, Inc. (Foundation) support the College’s mission. The annual financial statements of both organizations are rolled up into the College’s financial statements and are reflected in the totals on the Data First forms. The College has experienced a fluctuation in student fee revenue, net of student financial aid, between FY2011 and FY2015 decreasing from $13.7 million to $12.7 million. The reduction is due to the College’s decision to freeze student fees during fiscal years 2014 and 2015, and to a decrease in enrollment. State appropriation revenues have also fluctuated during this time, increasing from $26.9 million in FY2011 to $30.2 million in FY2015. Most recently, the College was able to absorb a 1.5% 9C reduction imposed by the Governor resulting in a $354,977 reduction in the State Appropriation in FY2015.


While revenues have fluctuated since FY2011, expenses have consistently increased. Total operating expenses were $66.5 million in FY2011 and $69.7 million in FY2015. Compensation and benefits continues to account for the majority of operating expenses in each fiscal year at 57.5% and 61.6% respectively. Net position, which represents the equity of the College and may serve over time as a useful indicator of the College’s financial position, has increased from $35.4 million in FY2011 to $40.2 million in FY 2015. The largest portion of the College’s net position (68% in FY2015) reflects its investments in capital assets, less any related debt, including outstanding capital lease obligations used to acquire those assets. An additional portion of the College’s net position (1% in FY2015) represents resources that are subject to external restrictions on how they must be used; these are comprised primarily of scholarships. The remaining balance of unrestricted net position (31% in FY2015) may be used to meet the College’s ongoing obligations to its stakeholders. The unrestricted net position reflected a 10% decrease from FY2014 to FY2015 which can be attributed to the College completing a number of previously approved capital projects, an early retirement incentive offered by the College, a decrease in enrollment, and the implementation of GASB 68 requiring the College to record its unfunded pension liability. In FY2013 the College received an infusion of resources towards modernizing and decentralizing the power plant. DCAMM funded $6.4 million, while the College has a contract to repay $3.1 million through the Commonwealth Energy Investment Program (CEIP) over a twenty-year period. The College is also completing the design development phase to renovate Building 19. The overarching goal of this project is to reinvigorate the existing historic shell of Building 19 to serve as a vital, welcoming, exciting student hub, and a central space for addressing student needs on a day-to-day basis. The College envisions Building 19 as a consolidated “Learning Commons and Student Hub” that co-locates essential resources and services, along with student amenity space. Through this project, the College is hoping to:

1. Establish a learning commons that combines a library with the College’s academic support services and resources in Building 19 (discussed throughout this report).

2. Consolidate student administrative/intake services, now dispersed across the campus. 3. Provide social spaces for students to study, socialize, and participate in college activities and

events. 4. Reduce significant campus-wide library and general use space shortfalls (categories that include

dining space, lounge and gathering space, recreation space, and retail space, as well as assembly and exhibition space).

The estimated cost of the project is $50 million with DCAMM funding $47 million and the College committing to the remaining $3 million due January 2017. As mentioned earlier, STCCAC and the Foundation are included in the College’s financial statements as discrete component units and are included in the Data First forms. It is worth noting that approximately half (48%) of the accounts receivable in FY2015 represent receivables from the component units. Also, approximately $5.9 million of the $8.8 million debt originates from the component units. STCCAC received an emphasis-of-matter paragraph in its financial statements regarding a going concern. The language in the paragraph included, “The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company (STCCAC) will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 13 to STCCAC’s financial statements, STCCAC has insufficient funds to pay current obligations, which raises


substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern...” The going concern does not affect the audit opinion for the College, nor will it have any fiscal impact to the College in the future for any outstanding liabilities. The College’s stable financial position and careful planning have ensured that sufficient funds are available to support the overall mission and purpose of the College.

Standard Ten: Public Disclosure

STCC has made significant progress in addressing our communication to prospective students, current students and our community since our 2010 Self-Study for NEASC. Recognizing the rapidly changing technology landscape and our need to be ahead of the curve as the only technical community college in Massachusetts, the College pursued the following technology initiatives, reflecting our commitment to improve how we communicate. In June 2015, the College contracted with higher education website design vendor Terminal 4 and their design partner iFactory to completely redesign www.stcc.edu to become a responsive, user-focused experience. A content management system (CMS), necessary to establish a systematic review and updating process for our website, will also be developed. In prior years, the College relied on the webmaster to make all updates. The implementation of a CMS will allow approved content managers to make changes to their own pages that will be reviewed by other administrators before being published. The website is the number one source for prospective students and our community to access information about the College. A snapshot of our monthly website traffic in October 2015 shows 164,987 users who accessed www.stcc.edu. Data shows that users accessed our website from desktop 109,071 (66.1%), mobile 47,749 (28.9%) and tablet 8,167 (5.0%) devices. As we continue to see mobile usage increase, we are confident that the mobile application included in our website redesign will significantly improve communication to our prospective and current students. The website redesign process has used student surveys (201 responses), faculty/staff surveys (167 responses), and interviews with the Executive Team, Deans, and Directors. A town hall meeting was held on campus during which our design partners shared survey results and attendees expressed agreement that iFactory had satisfactorily captured the campus community desire for a website that clearly and simply communicates our mission, our diversity, career and transfer opportunities, and provides simple steps to enroll at the College. The redesign of www.stcc.edu has an anticipated completion date of Fall 2016. In Spring 2013, the College implemented an electronic catalog, Acalog, as an alternative to housing catalog data on its own web server. Acalog is a CMS that allows catalog information to be accessed on various platforms (including mobile devices), and facilitates archiving catalog information. In mid-March of each year, the following academic year's catalog is published after curriculum changes are made, and after the annual review of other catalog information (e.g., academic policies, student service information). The College's current catalog (AY15/16) is the third published in the Acalog format. In Fall 2015, the College began digitally-archiving all of its pre-2013 catalogs with the goal of making every catalog since the College's inception in 1967 accessible to the public. This project should be completed by June 2016.

http://www.stcc.edu/




In June 2014, STCCnet, the college’s campus wide portal went live. Currently, there are approximately 50 unique content pages and over 50 links to other locations. October 2015 saw 40,000 page views by 400 unique viewers. The Website Redesign Project Team is in the process of identifying website content that will be migrated to the portal, with the portal becoming the primary repository for information for our internal audience (i.e., students, faculty and staff). While only 6% of the student body currently utilizes STCCnet, we expect that the migration of information for current students from the website to the portal to dramatically impact adoption and usage of STCCnet. In anticipation of this, workshops are in development to support campus portal use (see Standard Six). A new system for communicating with prospective students, Enrollment Rx, implemented in Fall 2015, is a customer relationship management tool used to contact prospective students. Applicants receive email or SMS text reminders during the application process, as well as notifications about Admissions activities and events. Prospective students also have the ability to respond to notifications via text or email. Data show that 1,715 students opted-in for text messages for Fall 2015 and currently 349 students have opted-in for texts for Spring 2016. The College will be streamlining the system for documenting faculty credentials. Human Resources and Information Technology will be developing a solution utilizing the college’s Colleague Student Information System to store faculty credentials at the point of hire that can easily be uploaded to a dedicated webpage. We expect this project to be completed by Fall 2016. The College continues to utilize social media as a frequent communication method to reach both prospective and current students as well as to spread news to be picked-up by media outlets (see Standard Six). The Massachusetts Community Colleges Executive Office recently ranked the Commonwealth’s fifteen community colleges for number of Twitter followers - STCC placed sixth with 1,570 Twitter followers. Our YouTube channel currently boasts 34,562 views. Facebook usage has been less robust with 2,254 likes. We are currently adding Facebook advertising to our marketing initiatives and anticipate an increase in usage. We also have an Instagram account to share photos as our data shows our social media response rate increases when photos are included. The challenge with social media is the staff time required to create daily content. Twitter has proven to be our most successful format for spreading news and monitoring feedback. The Marketing and Communications staff monitor social media both to address student inquiries and to provide information to our Chief of Police and Dean of Students on potential threats to campus safety. Finally, as documented in the Standard Ten data first forms, all HEOA and other required disclosures are regularly updated on the website.

Standard Eleven: Integrity

STCC’s institutional values include “dedication, integrity, respect, community, student –centered, and caring and commitment.” Integrity stands as a foundational component of the academic culture at STCC as seen in the Student Code of Conduct and the Student Success Plan. The College’s employee-centered commitment to integrity is demonstrated through New Employee Orientation training as well as the College’s annual compliance with the Commonwealth’s ethics training. The Self-Study report conducted for NEASC in 2010 identified two areas related to integrity in which the College needed to improve. These were:


• Assure that the college consistently acts in a fair and ethical manner and remains vigilant concerning ethical behaviors of students, faculty and other employees.

• As an urban-based community college, STCC will strive to create a safe and comfortable environment in which all can flourish and which reflects the community it serves.

At the time of the Self-Study, a number of changes had begun within the College’s Human Resources Department. The department has grown from a staff of three full-time employees to four full-time employees. The policies on ethics and affirmative action are located not only on the College website but also the Human Resources Employee Portal. Furthermore, a portal page dedicated to Title IX has been established. Annual compliance with College policy distributions has continued to occur. As mentioned in Standard Five, hiring diverse faculty and staff and creating an inclusive environment to maintain them are priorities for STCC. The recently developed manager’s guide speaks to the College’s commitment to diversity by providing managers with a list of advertisers that market specifically to more diverse candidate pool. The College will continue to increase advertising to under-represented groups along with improving awareness of open positions within the community through grassroots efforts. To that end, the HR department has begun to send out weekly emails of open positions that employees can share with their professional colleagues. In addition, the Human Resources Department is currently creating an Affirmative Action Plan (AAP) that will connect hiring goals to our surrounding community make-up. The development of the five-year AAP will be completed by the end of FY2016.

ASSESSMENT, RETENTION, and STUDENT SUCCESS

Over the last five years, STCC has continued to develop and expand methods to understand the needs of students, determine what they are learning, and close any gaps in the differences between aspirations for our students and actual outcomes. As described in Area of Emphasis 1, the College has many new and continuing ways of learning about our students, and the results to date as well as next steps are included in this section. First, we review the outcomes of student learning not only in the classroom but also in our support and service areas. Then, we review measures of student success, taking inventory of how students are faring through their educational path at STCC, from enrollment to completion. The data presented in this section comes from analyses provided by the STCC Institutional Research Office (also see the S series) as well as from survey analyses and assessment evidence provided by the Office of Assessment (also see the E1a and E1b Series). Where available we provide community college benchmark data from the Massachusetts Department of Higher Education Linear Trends publication and/or from Achieving the Dream (ATD). In the case of ATD data, there are two comparison groups: the first group is comprised of community colleges that joined the ATD network the same year as STCC and the second group is comprised of all ATD network community colleges, numbering approximately 200. 1. Assessment of Student Learning STCC expects students to have developed competency in five core areas upon graduation from any associate’s degree program at the College: Written and Oral Communication; Critical Thinking; Quantitative Reasoning; Information Literacy; and Computer Literacy. In the past, many programs relied on specific courses for students to learn these competencies, consistent with a traditional General Education model. Over the last few years, STCC has moved to an embedded model where, in addition to


any general education course requirements a program might have, students also practice and develop these core competencies in the context of their program. To assess student core competency outcomes, STCC now relies on several direct and indirect measures, the results of which are described below. Institution-Level Evidence of Learning Over the last three years, a group of 10-12 faculty members from all academic divisions of the College have gathered to assess evidence of competency in Written Communication, Critical Thinking, and Quantitative Reasoning. The CCAT (see Area of Emphasis 1) used LEAP rubrics to score several hundred written work samples from students majoring in programs across all divisions of the College (samples had been scrubbed to omit any faculty, course, or student identifying information). Surveys of faculty submitting student samples also assessed whether assignments explicitly required or implicitly expected students to demonstrate specific competencies. Work from students who had completed fewer than 45 credits of college-level work was compared with work from students having completed 45 or more credits, readying for graduation. Using the Critical Thinking LEAP Value rubric, the CCAT found that at least 85% of the samples from students who had completed 45 or more credits of college-level work scored a 2 or higher for skills demonstrating abilities to explain critical issues, state their position, and draw conclusions. Less than 80% of student samples scored a 2 or higher where assumptions needed to be stated or evidence provided to support their position. The proportion of samples from students who had completed less than 45 college-level credits receiving a 2 or higher on these same skills ranged from 61% to 79%. The LEAP rubric ranges from 0 (no evidence of skill) to 1 (a basic demonstration of the skill) to 4 (aspirational abilities in the skill) and is used by 2- and 4-year colleges alike. Using the Written Communication LEAP Value rubric, the CCAT also found that samples from students completing 45 or more college-level credits demonstrated more developed skills than seen in samples from students who had completed less than 45 credits. Again, the least developed Written Communication skill in all samples was students’ ability to provide evidence to support their arguments and cite their sources. The findings from this past summer’s CCAT work for skills associated with Quantitative Reasoning were less clear – students with more college experience demonstrated skills that were stronger in some cases (e.g., Analysis, Communication) but not for others (e.g., Calculations, Representation). Part of the lack of clarity was due to the LEAP rubric itself – our faculty will be creating their own rubric that better reflects the skills required of students in this competency. Nevertheless, samples demonstrating students’ ability to communicate the evidence provided by quantitative data had one of the lowest proportion of scores over 2 on the LEAP rubric. In addition to direct evidence of institution-level student learning from our CCAT group, we rely on two institution-level surveys to obtain indirect evidence of student learning: CCSSE conducted every three years with current students and the Graduating Student Survey conducted annually with students about to graduate. Data from the standard CCSSE survey, along with supplemental questions developed to complement the data needed on our core competencies, are compiled into reports organized by core competency and comparing performance changes over time. Although students’ perception of their critical thinking abilities have increased over time (see FIGURE 4) and are in line with national averages, the CCSSE survey does not specifically ask about a students’ ability to support their arguments with evidence.

http://www.stcc.edu/ir/surveys/ccsse2014/


FIGURE 4: CCSSE survey results demonstrating student-perceived abilities and experiences in critical thinking skills.

Data from surveys in 2007, 2011, and 2014 are provided as are comparison data to the national average.

Students graduating from STCC report critical thinking as their most developed skill in their time at the College (see FIGURE 5) and this perception of improved critical thinking skills has increased over the last three years (see FIGURE 6).

FIGURE 5: 2015 STCC Graduating Survey results showing that students perceive their most improved ability based

on their experience at the College is to think critically.


FIGURE 6: 2013-2015 STCC Graduating Survey results showing changes in students perception of their skills

developed during their education at STCC.

Reviewing three years of findings from both student samples and surveys, the CCAT noted that for all three competencies assessed to date (Written Communication, Critical Thinking, and Quantitative Reasoning), one common theme among them was the ability of students to use evidence to support their written positions, logical arguments, or analyses of data. While students with more college experience demonstrated stronger skills in these areas than students with fewer college-level courses, students were nevertheless less competent in this skill than faculty members wished to see. As a result of these findings, the CCAT recommended that the Institutional Effectiveness department develop a series of workshops and professional development day activities that would focus faculty emphasis on this skill in their respective program content areas for the academic year 2015-2016. The Faculty Professional Development Day in September 2015 offered opportunities to (a) review institution-level direct and indirect data on student learning, (b) hear from faculty colleagues who have implemented changes in their course or program based on student learning data, and (c) complete department and program SOAR processes (discussed in the next section, Course-and Program-Level Evidence of Learning). To further support these efforts in improving student learning outcomes (including the skill of supporting arguments with evidence), the Assessment Office has developed a 5-part workshop series for the academic year focused on scaffolding learning outcomes across programs, incorporating core competency skills into assignments, using rubrics to measure core competency skills, measuring department-level core competency skills, and reviewing department-level data for decision making. The workshops centered on supporting faculty making changes to their assignments, courses and programs such that more practice on these competencies and skills were provided to students without displacing course content. Faculty brought assignments and syllabi to the workshops to make changes, worked to


develop program-level rubrics to measure student artifacts from their departments, and developed methods to measure changes in their students’ abilities using direct and indirect assessment techniques. Given all of these efforts by individual faculty and many programs, the CCAT determined that they will re-assess Critical Thinking during Summer 2016 using the LEAP Value rubric. Given the schedule of assessing a different core competency each summer, the CCAT would normally be focusing on Information Literacy or Computer Literacy (the next two institution-wide competencies to assess) but because of the work that has been done in the last two years to improve students’ critical thinking-related skills, the CCAT will interrupt the schedule to do this work. Indeed, it makes abundant sense to see if the efforts of faculty and staff supporting them are resulting in improvements in student skills and competencies. Thus, using data from college-wide student samples that will be assessed in Summer 2016 as well as survey results from the Graduating Student Survey that will be collected in May 2016, the CCAT will determine if the changes implemented in courses and programs (through the College’s SOAR process, see Area of Emphasis 1) have been effective. Results of direct and indirect assessment are shared college-wide, not only through the Student Success Council but also integrated into presentations at college-wide employee and division meetings as well sent out to the campus community in written reports, accessible on the College’s website or portal, and integrated into professional development days and workshops. Not only have these results informed areas of improvement outlined in the Student Success Plan, but faculty and entire departments have used the direct and indirect results to make changes to their courses or program pedagogy. In short, our process is now to collect direct and indirect evidence of student learning, to share widely the outcomes, to support faculty who are making changes based on the outcomes through professional development days, workshops, and consultations, and then to re-assess student learning to launch the cycle again. Program- and Course-Level Evidence of Learning As mentioned previously, there has been a shift in all programs from relying on specific courses to develop students’ institution-level, general education learning outcomes to taking on much of that work in the context of the program itself. Although many programs continue to have general education courses as a critical part of their course sequences, these same programs contextualize and develop these learning outcomes within their particular academic domain. To support this shift in learning outcome development, a new process, Student Outcomes Annual Reflection (SOAR, described in Area of Emphasis 1) was developed in 2013. As can be seen in the E1a form, many departments and programs now have the SOAR process as an integral part of their review of program-level and institution-level outcomes as developed in their particular domain. For the last two years, the Fall Faculty Professional Development Day has been used not only to provide faculty with the time and support to reflect and review their program and institution-level learning outcomes data, but also to learn how other faculty and other departments accomplish this work. In the last two years, over 300 faculty from all departments and academic divisions have participated in the SOAR process. Each year, in a post-professional development day evaluation, faculty provide feedback not only on the event but on the SOAR process itself so that changes can be made to make it more effective. During the Professional Development day, faculty learn about institution-level findings (e.g., CCAT direct assessment, CCSSE and Graduating Student Survey indirect assessment) and are provided with course success rates (%ABC) reports for each term from the Institutional Research office to see how student learning outcomes and course grades align. On that Professional Development Day, faculty begin the


work of making changes to their courses and programs based on all of these data. As described above, a series of workshops throughout the academic year continue to support faculty making these improvements and then doing the work of measuring the resulting outcomes. The SOAR process also supports programs that have external accreditation. Faculty have noted that the focus of program-level accreditation is oftentimes career-specific skills and abilities with less emphasis on higher-order learning outcomes (e.g., critical thinking, written communication). Indeed, one faculty member said, “I know my students can execute 132 skills, but how do I know they can THINK?” Towards those ends, the SOAR process has supported departments with external accreditation who want to be assured that their students can transfer their skills and solve problems beyond those they were exposed to in their academic, clinical, and laboratory-based settings. In support of the SOAR process and the shift to department-contextualized student learning outcomes, a professional development program centered on assessment has been developed. Topic examples include “STCC's Institutional Assessment Process: What does our CCAT do? “ “Sources and Evidence: The Missing Link,” or “Quantitative Reasoning: How to include additional practice through your course content.” In the last three years, a majority of full-time faculty and many adjunct faculty have attended these workshops. Following their attendance, we asked faculty if they were going to apply what they learned and make changes to their assignment and courses – over 90% responded in the affirmative. To further support faculty improvement efforts, the College has held regional workshops so that smaller departments can collaborate with faculty from other campuses to obtain feedback on their assignments, courses, and programs. STCC has also brought experts (e.g., Barbara Walvoord) to campus to support faculty efforts – these opportunities have had tremendous attendance (e.g., over 90 faculty attended a two-weekend series three years ago). The Institutional Effectiveness department launched an Innovation Grant program that faculty could apply for to support the changes they wanted to make to their courses and programs based on direct and/or indirect assessment data they had analyzed. In the last three years, 24 grants have been awarded to faculty, both full-time and adjunct, who have made changes to their assignments, courses, and programs as a result. Moreover, faculty who receive Assessment Grants share their methods, findings, and pedagogical changes with their peers at various venues including professional development day, assessment workshops, and at an on-campus conference, Assess for Success, throughout the academic year. Finally, in support of their work, many departments reach out to the Institutional Effectiveness team to obtain more data, find guidance in collecting and interpreting student outcomes information, and gain support in implementing changes to their assignments and courses.

At a campus event, Assess for Success, faculty members were eager to share what they learned from their Innovation Grant-related work. In cross-disciplinary sessions, faculty and staff learned how assessment methods and techniques could be creatively and strategically used to improve student learning and success. One attendee said this about the day, “We have fantastic things going on here… I think the info presented overall was fantastic, relevant and deep. These types of presentations really can build morale and future collaborations across disciplines. More, more, more!”


Complementing our program and department-level assessment work is the assessment work that programs complete for their professional external accrediting bodies. As seen in the E1b form, fifteen programs at the College are currently in good standing with their accrediting bodies. Two more programs are exploring possible professional accreditation. Academic Support Services About four years ago, STCC implemented a process improvement method, Great Ideas, to support frontline service improvements in support and student service departments. Departments meet weekly, vote on ideas suggested by department staff to improve their services, and each member devotes one hour per week to address the issue. To further articulate department-level goals and track outcomes, our support service areas also engaged in their own SOAR effort, articulating goals for each department. Data from CCSSE were prepared for individual units (e.g., Advising, Financial Aid) and student success analyses were conducted to evaluate the efficacy of initiatives such as Intrusive Advising (described in Standard Six). The cumulative effects of these efforts can be seen in FIGURE 7 below. In 2014, student perception had improved such that 28% of students gave services the highest possible rating on the CCSSE survey relative to 17% in 2007.

FIGURE 7: CCSSE results showing improved overall student perception of support and service areas at STCC from

2007 to 2014. 2. Measures of Student Success As an Achieving the Dream (ATD) Leader College, we have found using the ATD cohort definition particularly helpful for understanding the enrollment, progress, and completion of our students. While the IPEDS cohort accounts for about 20% of our new students in any given year, the ATD cohort accounts for about 60% since we include all students without prior degrees who are new to the college or are transferring in, whether they are full-time or part-time students. Although the inclusion of part-time students affects our 3-year/150% graduation rates in particular (IPEDS 2010FA: 21%; ATD 2010FA: 17%), the ATD-defined cohort provides a more comprehensive view of our student body. This is the cohort to which we refer throughout this section unless otherwise indicated. These data are included in the S series forms.

http://www.stcc.edu/ir/surveys/ccsse2014/


Given our College’s mission to work with chronically underserved students, the equity of their educational outcomes is critical. We want to understand student success in all aspects of the educational arc: enrolling students, continuing their education at the College, succeeding in their courses, accumulating college-level credits, and persisting to graduate, transfer, or continue their enrollment. Not only do we want to know about students in each of these phases, but we also want to see the trends in performance in each phase over time in order to learn about the efficacy of our interventions and improvement efforts. Given our increase in students of color (see FIGURE 8) and having become an HSI as of Fall 2013, we are also interested in addressing achievement gaps in student outcomes.

FIGURE 8: Proportion of entering students (including new, transfer, full-time, part-time) as a function of

race/ethnicity.

College Readiness More than 50% of our entering students come from Springfield, MA, where current high school graduation rates are approximately 60% relative to the state’s average of 85%. Moreover, 10th-grade students in the Springfield school system recently averaged 75% pass rates on the state’s English MCAS exams relative to the state’s average of 91% and 46% on the Math MCAS exams relative to the state’s average of 79%. In short, the students that come to STCC are often chronically underserved and our ability to correctly place them in developmental- and college-levels courses is critically important to future credential completion. Given the above high school data, it is not surprising then that in 2014, nearly 80% of our ATD-defined cohort entered STCC with at least one developmental placement (see FIGURE 9) and this figure is even higher for our students identifying as Hispanic or Black (see FIGURE 10). While that is an improvement from 90% in 2008, the College, in collaboration with the Department of Higher Education (DHE), is exploring means of alternative placements in addition to or instead of the state-required Accuplacer exams (see Standard Four). While the description of “college ready” has changed over time (e.g., students now need Algebra I rather than Algebra II completed in order to take college-level Statistics), there is nevertheless a race/ethnicity based inequity in college readiness, a reflection of the way in which many of our students have been the chronically underserved.


FIGURE 9: Proportion of entering students who are and are not College Ready (no developmental placements).

FIGURE 10: Proportion of entering students who are and are not College Ready as a function of Race/Ethnicity.


In addition to exploring how placements can be improved, faculty and staff have made strides in improving outcomes in developmental courses and shortening or optimizing the sequence of courses (see Standard Four). For example, mathematics faculty have developed a 5-day version of each developmental course designed to optimize the retention and outcomes of students at the highest risk. English faculty have developed Open English where students take both the developmental course and Composition I with the same faculty member in the same semester. With this new model, student complete 4 credits of work rather than 6 credits in the old model, 3 of which did not count towards degree completion. This approach has proved highly successful and efforts are underway to expand the initiative.

Fall-to-Spring Retention Coming to college but being deemed “not ready” to complete college-level courses oftentimes surprises and discourages students. Thus, retaining them at the College during their first semester is critical and STCC has consistently outperformed other ATD network colleges in this regard (see FIGURE 11). Several initiatives at the College have focused on this issue, in particular our Intrusive Advising program and our College Success courses. As noted in Standard 6, incoming General Studies (LTGS.AS) students with developmental placements are provided with a professional advisor skilled in proactive advising methods and are also advised to take a college-preparation, study skill course, College Success. Students who are both intrusively-advised AND take College Success have a higher likelihood of being retained from Fall to Spring at the College despite their developmental placements (CS&IA: 85%, no CS or IA: 76%). These efforts have contributed to closing the race/ethnicity-based differences in Fall-to-Spring retention (see FIGURE 12). Making solid connections to these students through highly-personalized, TRiO-like advising, through 5-day math courses, and through Open English has greatly improved the retention of students through their first semester.

FIGURE 11: Proportion of new students retained from the fall to the spring semester. STCC performance is

compared to (a) Colleges entering the ATD network in the same year as STCC and (b) every College in the ATD network.


FIGURE 12: Proportion of new students retained from the fall to the spring semester disaggregated by

Race/Ethnicity.

Fall-to-Fall Retention The next challenge is retaining students through the summer break. Our Fall-to-Fall retention, while improving somewhat and consistently outperforming other ATD network colleges, is not as strong as we want it to be (see FIGURE 13) nor have the race/ethnicity inequities been overcome as they have in Fall-to-Spring retention (see FIGURE 14). Fall-to-fall retention of students identifying as black has improved from 40% in 2008 to about 60% in 2014 and for students identifying as Hispanic or Latino, from 40% to about 50%. Students identifying as white are retained from one fall to the next about 60% of the time and that has not changed significantly over the same timeframe. Intrusive advising has proved helpful for students with developmental needs in their first year. When students transition to faculty advisors in the second year, once their developmental courses have been completed, advising becomes less frequent, formal, and proactive. With the Title III grant, the College will be implementing advising-focused professional development opportunities for faculty, designed by a faculty cohort in collaboration with professional advisors. The faculty-led initiative, Advising is Teaching, is intended to change the advising culture for faculty. Faculty advising has often focused on helping students register for classes; the initiative will introduce a more holistic approach where the students’ goals and strengths are the heart of the advising experience. The initiative provides professional development for faculty so that advising will be more consistent and will benefit from what professional advisors have learned through TRiO and Intrusive Advising. Moreover, with faculty using the same, proven techniques currently used by our professional advisors, we expect the transition from professional advisors in students’ first year to faculty advisors in students’ second year to be smoother.


FIGURE 13: Proportion of new students retained from the fall to the fall semester. STCC performance is compared

to (a) Colleges entering the ATD network in the same year as STCC and (b) every College in the ATD network.

FIGURE 14: Proportion of new students retained from the fall to the fall semester disaggregated by Race/Ethnicity.

We will then assess whether these improvements to ongoing advising practices improve our Fall-to-Fall retention outcomes, especially since they have been helpful in our Fall-to-Spring retention efforts. Likewise, since 5-day math courses have proved helpful in retaining students in our developmental math sequences, faculty are exploring the potential efficacy of 5-day college-level Statistics courses for students transitioning from Algebra I to their first college-level course. Again, we expect that applying methods that have been successful for developmental students in their first term will better support them in subsequent terms.


Success in Courses A fundamental component of degree completion is success in individual courses. For the last two years, the Office of Institutional Research compiles a report for every department and program showing the success rates (%ABC) and other metrics (e.g., %DF, %WI) for their courses each semester. From an institutional perspective, we are interested in overall course success over time and as a function of college readiness and race/ethnicity, two of our major areas of concern. Although not computed in exactly the same way, for benchmarking purposes, the latest state Linear Trends report shows that students at STCC have an 80% course success rate relative to all 15 Massachusetts community colleges showing a 79% course success rate. College-ready students demonstrate improving course success rates in their first semester, from 74% earning ABC’s in 2008 to 83% doing so in 2014 (see FIGURE 15). Students who are not college-ready demonstrate more modest gains, improving from 62% in 2008 to 69% in 2014. In contrast, there has been little change in %ABC rates between 2008 and 2014 when disaggregated by race/ethnicity (see FIGURE 16).

FIGURE 15: Course success rates: Proportion of students earning A’s, B’s, and C’s; D’s and F’s, or withdrawing or

ending the semester with incomplete work.


FIGURE 16: Course success rates disaggregated by Race/Ethnicity: Proportion of students earning A’s, B’s, and C’s;

D’s and F’s, or withdrawing or ending the semester with incomplete work.

Students’ improvement as a function of readiness in the absence of improvement as a function of race/ethnicity suggests that some student cohorts are differentially experiencing improvement in their course retention and completion. Indeed, when we compare college-ready %ABC rates by race/ethnicity in 2008 (see FIGURE 17a) relative to 2014 (see FIGURE 17b), we see that these college-ready students have seen tremendous gains. However, we already know that college-readiness is much lower for students of color than for students identifying as white. This means that fewer students of color are profiting from the improvements seen in %ABC rates over time. Since earning an A, B, or C in a course is a critical building block for credential completion, helping students meet the standards in the classroom for success is of utmost importance. Addressing this issue is a goal in our current Student Success Plan and will be supported by our upcoming Title III work. Two actions STCC will be taking over the next five years to address the inequities seen in course success outcomes include (1) developing a peer-led Supplemental Instruction program focused on high-enrollment courses, and (2) providing intensive professional development to support institution-wide cultural competency training. Cultural competency training will involve the redesign of traditional and online courses and service and support delivery including the inclusion of family (based on student feedback and national literature) to our New Student Orientation. These issues and recommended actions were identified as a part of the quantitative and qualitative data collection that occurred as a part of the strategic planning process last academic year (see Standard Two).


FIGURE 17a and b: Course success rates in (a) 2008 and (b) 2014 disaggregated by college-readiness and

Race/Ethnicity: Proportion of students earning A’s, B’s, and C’s; D’s and F’s, or withdrawing or ending the semester with incomplete work.

College-Level Credit Accumulation Looking at the timeframe over which students accumulate college-level credits is an important and new analysis for our Institutional Research Office. The preliminary data presented here represent a slightly different cohort (all new Fall semester students) than other analyses in this section which use our ATD student cohort. By the time of our next NEASC self-study, we will have data beginning in 2008 so like other analyses presented here, we will be able to assess trends over time. For this preliminary analysis, we looked at the proportion of new students entering in Fall 2010 completing college-level credits each term. To complete a 60-credit credential on time, students should be accruing about 15 credits each semester for four semesters. More commonly, due to their part-time status, stop-outs, or taking 12 credits as full-time (using financial aid guidelines), students take longer than four semesters to complete their credential. The table in FIGURE 18 below shows the proportion of new Fall 2010 students (without prior credentials) who successfully completed college-level credits by the end of each term. The ideal pathway to complete an associate’s degree in two years is highlighted.


Credit AccumulationTOTAL 2010FA 2011SP 2011FA 2012SP 2012FA 2013SP

zero 28% 23% 22% 21% 20% 20%1 to 15 70% 48% 37% 33% 32% 31%16 to 30 2% 27% 27% 21% 18% 17%31 to 45 1% 12% 15% 15% 12%46 to 60 1% 8% 12% 13%60+ 2% 3% 7%

FIGURE 18: Proportion of students in the 2010 Fall cohort completing college-level credits by the end of each

semester. College-level credits are clustered into categories of credits ranging from zero to 60+. The ideal number of credits to earn each term to complete an associate’s degree in two years is highlighted

One notable finding is that 20% of incoming students never complete any college-level credits in three years. This represents students who leave the College by either transferring elsewhere or dropping out. These data also show that very few students complete a sufficient number of credits to graduate either in 100% (2 years) or 150% (3 years) normal time. These troubling patterns are reflected in our current graduation rates reviewed below. We also disaggregated these data by race/ethnicity to explore possible inequities in college-level credit accumulation (see FIGURE 19). We expected to see inequities since the ability to accumulate college-level credits is the product of retention at the College, developmental sequence completion, and completing courses successfully. Since at least two of these measures demonstrated race/ethnicity-based inequities, we expected to see similar findings in this analysis and that proved true. In the first term, fewer students of color completed 1-to-15 college-level credits than did students identifying as white. This is not surprising given that more students of color place into developmental coursework. By the end of sixth semester, the proportion of students of color completing 45 or more college-level credits is half of that for students identifying as white. These preliminary data clearly demonstrate the results of multiple inequities on the progress towards and likelihood of completing a credential. In short, these findings confirm the urgency with which our actions to address race/ethnicity-based inequities are needed, as described in this section and elsewhere (e.g., Standards Two and Four).


BLACK 2010FA 2011SP 2011FA 2012SP 2012FA 2013SPzero 37% 29% 27% 26% 25% 25%1 to 15 63% 57% 45% 42% 41% 40%16 to 30 14% 22% 18% 12% 13%31 to 45 1% 7% 11% 14% 10%46 to 60 3% 7% 10%60+ 2%

HISPANIC 2010FA 2011SP 2011FA 2012SP 2012FA 2013SPzero 34% 29% 27% 27% 26% 26%1 to 15 64% 54% 41% 38% 38% 36%16 to 30 1% 17% 22% 20% 16% 16%31 to 45 0% 9% 10% 12% 10%46 to 60 5% 8% 9%60+ 0% 0% 4%

WHITE 2010FA 2011SP 2011FA 2012SP 2012FA 2013SPzero 17% 14% 13% 13% 13% 12%1 to 15 79% 44% 34% 30% 27% 27%16 to 30 3% 40% 34% 24% 22% 19%31 to 45 2% 17% 20% 16% 16%46 to 60 3% 11% 17% 16%60+ 3% 5% 10%

FIGURE 19: Proportion of students in the 2010 Fall cohort completing college-level credits by the end of each

semester disaggregated by Race/Ethnicity. College-level credits are clustered into categories of credits ranging from zero to 60+. The ideal number of credits to earn each term to complete an associate’s degree in two years is

highlighted. Graduation and Persistence The culmination of retention, successful course completion and credit accumulation is graduation, transfer or continued enrollment. Here we review both three-year graduation rates and persistence rates. To compute persistence rates for each cohort, we first looked at who graduated in three years, then of the remaining, who transferred to another college, and of the remaining, who was still enrolled at STCC. Adding those three groups together gives us the persistence rate. First, we looked at the graduation rates (see also S Series Data) and persistence rates of students who enter the college-ready versus those who are not (see FIGURES 20a and b). First, we note that both rates are substantially greater for students who enter college-ready and that the graduation rate has increased from 27% for the 2008 Fall cohort to 47% for the 2012 Fall cohort. The graduation rate has been relatively stagnant over that same period of time for students who are not college-ready and who make up the majority of the cohort. The persistence rates have remained relatively steady over this same time frame, at about 48% for students who are not college-ready and about 70% for those who are. One might wonder why the persistence rate doesn’t also rise dramatically when the graduation


rate does. This is because when more students graduate, there are fewer students remaining who can transfer and remain enrolled. To see a significant increase in persistence rates, students who leave higher education all together (e.g., do not graduate, transfer or remain enrolled) would have to decrease, which has not been the case. In short, these are the data that are driving the College’s continued and amplified efforts to address students’ developmental needs, described in Standard Four.

FIGURES 20 a and b: Proportion of students (a) graduating and (b) persisting over three years disaggregated by

college readiness. Second, we reviewed these rates as a function of race/ethnicity to determine existing inequities (see FIGURES 21a and b). Here we see higher graduation rates for students identifying as white (2008 cohort: 23%, 2012 cohort: 33%) than for students identifying as either black (2008 cohort: 8%, 2012 cohort: 15%) or Hispanic/Latino (2008 cohort: 9%, 2012 cohort: 13%). Although all groups have demonstrated some increase in graduation rates, the rate for students identifying as white have increased the most. Persistence rates disaggregated by race/ethnicity have remained relatively flat and also demonstrate an inequity in persistence. Again, these data inform the actions described in this report to address existing inequities in course and credential completion.


FIGURES 21 a and b: Proportion of students (a) graduating and (b) persisting over three years disaggregated by

Race/Ethnicity. Third, it makes sense that graduation rates would be sensitive to the credit load that students take. Presumably students who are able to work on their college courses full-time have an advantage over students who are only able to work part-time. Of note, all race/ethnicity sub-cohorts have about the same proportion of full-time students each year, about 60%-70% of the group (defining 12 or more credits as full-time). What we can see in FIGURE 22a and b below is that the graduation rate for students attending full-time is, as expected, higher than for those students who attend part-time although the magnitude of that advantage is decreasing. Both full-time and part-time student graduation rates have improved, but the part-time group has seen a more substantial increase (2008 cohort: 6%, 2012 cohort: 18%) than has the full-time group (2008 cohort: 20%, 2012 cohort: 25%). The persistence rate has remained relatively flat for both groups with 55% of full-time students persisting after three years relative to 40% of part-time students persisting. We will be exploring this improvement in part-time student graduation rates to understand the causes – is it because students are becoming more successful in their courses? Is it because part-time students are transferring-in more prior credits? Is it because part-time students are becoming more college-ready? Or do more students who are classified as part-time when they enter transition to full-time later in their academic careers? When we identify the underlying factors, we will be able to better assist our part-time students in their work toward credential completion.


FIGURES 22 a and b: Proportion of students (a) graduating and (b) persisting over three years disaggregated by full-

time/part-time credit load. Finally, to provide a benchmark with regard to STCC students graduation and persistence rates, we looked to the state’s most recent Fall 2014 Linear Trends report. The state analysis makes use of a 6-year rate and adopts a different cohort definition; nevertheless we see that STCC students graduate at a higher rate, 44.9%, relative to students from all Massachusetts community colleges, 38.3%. Likewise, STCC students persist at a modestly higher rate, 79.1%, relative to students from all the Massachusetts community colleges, 78.3%. Indeed, STCC has consistently had graduation and persistence rates above the state average over the last several years. Nevertheless, the rates can and should be better and the inequities among our students should be reduced and we anticipate that the actions outlined throughout this report will do so.

INSTITUTIONAL PLANS

As we look to our work over the next five years, the goals, actions, and measures articulated in the STCC Student Plan (SSP), our Title III grant, and this Interim Study will serve to improve our student outcomes and experiences in the following areas:

ACADEMICS: As a result of implementing the Title III activities and the initiatives outlined in the SSP, the College expects more students to successfully complete their course work resulting in higher and more equitable course success rates. More importantly, in order to initiate a permanent change in the campus culture, the College will work towards becoming a more culturally responsive institution in both its services and its curriculum. To do this, STCC will provide extensive professional development for


faculty and staff to be more responsive to our changing student cohorts. Professional development activities will also support faculty working with chronically underserved students in their classrooms. While many of our STCC students have encountered academic challenges prior to their arrival, we want to see each student meet their higher education goals and our faculty and staff need more responsive strategies and pedagogies to help them do that. As the campus community becomes more sensitive to the rich academic and personal diversity that our students bring to STCC, we in turn expect to improve course completion rates and retention rates for all students, especially among those who have faced the most inequities. Longer-term, we anticipate improvement of both graduation and persistence rates.

In the next five years, STCC will continue to improve its developmental education initiatives, such as Open English, and explore new ones such as a co-requisite math model proposed by the DHE. We will also be launching a Supplemental Instruction peer-led program for high-enrollment, lower-success courses that we expect to disproportionately support students who are not college-ready. Given the existing disparities that our data show between students who are college-ready and those who are not, accelerating developmental education and improving related course outcomes is critical. We expect this challenge to grow over time as our student body includes more students of color, already the majority at STCC, who have been chronically underserved and disproportionately need developmental education to achieve college-readiness.

STUDENT SERVICES: By creating a more culturally responsive campus, by including families in New Student Orientation activities, and by making critical events that improve success mandatory (e.g., Accuplacer review sessions, New Student Orientation), the College expects students to have a better sense of academic expectations, how their core competencies will improve over the course of their education, and a better understanding of “how college works.” Moreover, with improvements to faculty advising methods (Advising is Teaching), a new Learning Commons (Building 19) that brings together all student support services and the library, and improvements to communications with students (e.g., the FYI Desk student-led initiative) we expect to improve our Fall-to-Fall retention rates and begin to address the achievement gaps experienced by students of color and students who are not college-ready. CCSSE surveys and our Graduating Student Survey will provide data on the efficacy of many of these initiatives.

FINANCIAL RESOURCES: With the continuous erosion of state support of community colleges and changes in regional demographics, enrollment management is a priority. The recent creation of the Dean of Enrollment Management position, as well as two cross-departmental committees—the Enrollment Management Initiatives Committee and Enrollment Management Operations Committee— is helping the College identify best practices in enrollment management for open-enrollment institutions. Supported by a new Enrollment Reporting system currently being built by members of the Institutional Effectiveness Department, these enrollment-related groups will be better equipped to respond to the changing demographics and subsequent enrollment patterns in the region. With these improvements, the College anticipates stabilizing our enrollment and avoiding any revenue-related shortfalls.

COMMUNITY and WORKFORCE RELATIONS: STCC continues to include and rely on the community in many ways: students from the regional K-12 school systems participate in many on-campus events and programs (including College Now/dual enrollment, STEM Academy, and Gateway to College alternative high school). Likewise, STCC benefits from the input of community members and employers serving on departmental advisory boards who review course offerings and student outcomes as they align with the needs of the regional workforce.


STCC will continue to respond to the community’s necessities resulting from changes in demographics and employment opportunities. Our participation in workforce training will increase significantly in the next few years as the 2018 opening date of the MGM Springfield casino approaches. Continued training partnerships with Holyoke Community College and local employers will also continue and grow.

The College will also continue its work, improving in the areas of emphasis identified by NEASC:

AREA OF EMPHASIS 1: Developing and implementing a comprehensive approach to assessing institutional effectiveness and student learning, including the use of data to inform planning and decision making. The Department of Institutional Effectiveness is the key resource for assessing outcomes, planning, and providing professional development to faculty and staff. A critical partner in all academic initiatives, the department will be able to continue to support a culture of assessment and evidence-informed planning. Given how under-resourced the College is relative to the needs of our students, all programs and initiatives have to be extremely efficient. AREA OF EMPHASIS 2: Assuring the effectiveness of the institution’s internal governance, particularly in the areas of fiscal decision-making and planning, to promote communication and provide for appropriate participation of all constituencies. By the end of the Fall 2016 semester, the AUC will have proposed, designed, and implemented an assessment of its effectiveness. Based on that and on-going assessments, improvements will be made to the policies and procedures of the AUC. AREA OF EMPHASIS 3: Reducing the deferred maintenance backlog and completing planned renovations. While the College implements programs to improve student enrollment and student success, it will also work on improving the physical plant. By 2020, the Learning Commons (Building 19) will be renovated and all enrollment and student support services, student social space, a cafeteria, and the library will be relocated there. The Learning Commons will serve as the new campus center, and has long been a part of President Ira Rubenzahl’s vision for the campus. As the Learning Commons is renovated, underground utilities will be replaced or upgraded, thereby improving services to all academic buildings on campus. Combining the renovation of the Learning Commons and upgrading underground utilities will efficiently address several deferred maintenance issues, while creating a vibrant center for student support. Following that work, the College will turn its attention to improving Building 20 that houses the health programs. Conversations with DCAMM have already started and the College expects renovations to begin in 2020. To address unresolved deferred maintenance issues, the College will continue to allocate $3.1 million annually to fund capital projects and some deferred maintenance, as well as lobby the Commonwealth, specifically DCAMM, for additional funding. AREA OF EMPHASIS 4: Implementing distance education programming. As more students attend STCC part-time, online offerings become a means of taking a full course load and still managing life’s other demands. STCC plans to submit a Substantive Change to offer an online degree. The College is currently drafting a comprehensive plan to address policies and procedures for online course development, training faculty and students to use Blackboard, and online course assessment. The College is also expanding its Open Educational Resources (OER) to help students mitigate the high cost of textbooks. An initiative between faculty and the library has already started, supported by a small grant from the STCC Foundation Office.


NEW LEADERSHIP: Significant to the institution’s plans are the changes that will come with new leadership. Vice Presidents of Academic Affairs and of Student and Multicultural Affairs have both been recently appointed. The College is also scheduled to search for two new academic deans, replacing those retiring from the School of Health and Patient Simulation (SHPS) and Library Services. Faculty and staff in SHPS have been instrumental in drafting the position description, sharing their vision of the new Dean’s role in the future of their health programs.

Finally, as the search for Dr. Rubenzahl’s replacement begins, it is important for the College to have a clear vision of its future, including its goals, actions to meet those goals, and measures of success. The SSP and its implementation plan, the Title III grant, and this Interim Study not only documents this work for the College, but paves a pathway for a future STCC President who can nurture and elaborate on these aspirations for improvement.


APPENDICES Appendix A: Affirmation of Compliance

Appendix B: Most Recent Audited Financial Statement

Appendix C: Auditor’s Management Letter

Appendix D: Data First Forms

Appendix E:

Option E1: Part A. Inventory of Educational Effectiveness Indicators

Option E1: Part B. Inventory of Specialized and Program Accreditation

Appendix F: S Series Forms

Appendix G: Springfield Technical Community College All-Unit Congress (AUC) By-Laws

Appendix H: STCC Board of Trustees and Board Committee Assignments

Appendix I: STCC Organizational Chart (abbreviated)

STCC 2016 Fifth-Year Interim Report Page 57



blchalfonte

Typewritten Text

blchalfonte

Typewritten Text

Appendix B. Most Recent Audited Financial Statement

blchalfonte

Typewritten Text


























































blchalfonte

Typewritten Text

Appendix C. Auditor's Management Letter



Appendix D. Data First Forms

Standard 1. Mission and Purposes

Document URL Date Approved by Board of Trustees Institutional Mission Statement http://www.stcc.edu/aboutstcc/ May 18, 2015

Mission: Springfield Technical Community College supports students as they transform their lives.

Standard 2: Planning and Evaluation

PLANS Year of

Completion Effective

Dates URL

Strategic Plans Current Strategic Plan 2015 2015-

2020 http://www.stcc.edu/aboutstcc/publications.asp

Next Strategic Plan n/a Other institution-wide plans Master plan 2015 *DCAMM still has not

finalized the latest Master Plan for the College and they will not release the plan until it has been fully approved by all parties.

Academic plan 2015 2015-2020

http://www.stcc.edu/aboutstcc/publications.asp

Financial plan 2016 Technology plan 2014 2014-

2016 http://www.stcc.edu/it/docs/ITPlanPresentationSteeringCommittee2015-2016.pptx

EVALUATION URL Academic program review Program review system (colleges and departments). System

last updated: 10/1/2015 https://sites.google.com/a

/stcc.edu/stcc-soars/?pli=1 Program review schedule (e.g., every 5 years) annual

http://www.stcc.edu/aboutstcc/






Standard 3: Organization and Governance

Please attach to this form:

1) A copy of the institution's organization chart(s). See Appendix I.

If there is a "related entity," such as a church or religious congregation, a state system, or a corporation, describe and document the relationship with the accredited institution. Name of the related entity Massachusetts Department of Higher Education URL of documentation of relationship http://www.mass.edu/

Governing Board URL By-laws http://www.stcc.edu/aboutstcc/boardtrustees.asp

Board members' names and affiliations http://www.stcc.edu/aboutstcc/boardtrustees.asp

Please see also Appendix H

State or Country Date Initiated Enrollment*Main campus MA 9/1/1968 9,313Other principal campusesBranch campusesOther instructional locations

Distance Learning, e-learning Date Initiated Enrollment**First on-line course 9/1/00 2,998**First program 50% or more on-line n/aFirst program 100% on-line n/a

Date Initiated Enrollment*Distance Learning, Other ModalityCorrespondence EducationLow-Residency Programs

Definitions

* Report here the annual unduplicated headcount for the most recently completed year.** unique annual headcount of students enrolled in any distance course that is >50% distance

CitySpringfield

n/a

n/an/a

Standard 3: Organization and Governance(Locations and Modalities)

Campuses, Branches, Locations, and Modalities Currently in Operation (See definitions, below)

Main campus: primary campus, including the principal office of the chief executive officer.

n/an/an/a

Other principal campus: a campus away from the main campus that either houses a portion or portions of the institution's Branch campus (federal definition): a location of an institution that is geographically apart and independent of the main campus Instructional location: a location away from the main campus where 50% or more of a degree or Title-IV eligible certificate can be Distance Learning, e-learning: A degree or Title-IV eligible certificate for which 50% or more of the courses can be completed Distance Learning, other: A degree or Title IV certificate in which 50% or more of the courses can be completed entirely through a Correspondence Education (federal definition): Education provided through one or more courses by an institution under which

http://www.mass.edu/

http://www.stcc.edu/aboutstcc/boardtrustees.asp



3 Years 2 Years 1 Year Current Next YearPrior Prior Prior Year* Forward (goal)

For Fall Term, as of Census Date (FY 2012) (FY2013) (FY 2014) (FY 2015) (FY 2016)Certificate 333 379 351 307 285Associate 6,204 5,902 5,718 5,351 5,000Baccalaureate n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aTotal Undergraduate 6,537 6,281 6,069 5,658 5,285


For Fall Term, as of Census Date (FY 2012) (FY2013) (FY 2014) (FY 2015) (FY 2016)Master's n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aDoctorate n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aFirst Professional n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aOther n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aTotal Graduate n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a


Annual (FY 2012) (FY2013) (FY 2014) (FY 2015) (FY 2016)Undergraduate 130,674 142,391 140,470 133,418 124,000Graduate n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Headcount by undergraduate program type is for credit-seeking students onlyUndergraduate credit hours generated taken from HEIRS annual file - credit hours by student level, excluding auditors

Credits hours for FY 2016 goals takes into account that both enrollment and credits per student have been falling in recent years.

4.2

Standard 4: The Academic ProgramHeadcount by GRADUATE Program Type

Standard 4: The Academic ProgramHeadcount by UNDERGRADUATE Program Type

Standard 4: The Academic Program4.3

*"Current Year" refers to the year in which the interim report is submitted to the Commission.

(Credit Hours Generated at Undergraduate and Graduate Levels)


Degree Level/ Location & Modality

Associate's Bachelor's Master's

Clinical doctorates

(e.g., Pharm.D., DPT, DNP)

Professional

doctorates (e.g., Ed.D., Psy.D., D.B.A.)

M.D., J.D., DDS

Ph.D.Total Degree-Seeking FTE

Main Campus FTE 3,165 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 3,165Other Campus FTE n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0Branches FTE n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0Other Locations FTE n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0Overseas Locations FTE n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0Multiple Health Affiliations FTE 22 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 22On-Line FTE 400 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 400Correspondence FTE n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aLow-Residency Programs FTE n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aTotal FTE 3,587 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 3,587Unduplicated Headcount Total 5,349 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 5,349Degrees Awarded, Most Recent Year 935 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 935

Student Type/ Location & Modality

Non-Matriculated Students

Visiting Students

Main Campus FTE 152 n/aOther Campus FTE n/a n/aBranches FTE n/a n/aOther Locations FTE n/a n/aOverseas Locations FTE n/a n/aMultiple Health Affiliations FTE n/a n/aOn-Line FTE 52 n/aCorrespondence FTE n/a n/aLow-Residency Programs FTE n/a n/aTotal FTE 204 n/aUnduplicated Headcount Total 628 n/aCertificates Awarded, Most Recent Year n/a n/a

Notes:

3) Please refer to form 3.2, "Locations and Modalities," for definitions of locations and instructional modalities.

* For programs not taught in the fall, report an analogous term's enrollment as of its Census Date.Above headcounts and FTEs based on 2015FA enrollment from HEIRS student and student course files. FTE is total credits divided by 15.

n/a

Standard 4: The Academic Program(Summary - Enrollment and Degrees)

Fall Enrollment* by location and modality, as of Census Date

Title IV-Eligible Certificates: Students

Seeking Certificates

203n/a

3

213

309

170

1) Enrollment numbers should include all students in the named categories, including students in continuing education and 2) Each student should be recorded in only one category, e.g., students enrolled in low-residency programs housed on the main

n/an/an/a

7


3 Years 2 Years 1 Year Next YearPrior Prior Forward (goal)

Number of Faculty FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PTProfessor 105 101 96 91 91Associate 17 17 14 20 20Assistant 23 29 26 31 34Instructor 2 1 5 5 5Other 0 363 344 0 333 0 305 0 295

Total 147 363 148 344 141 333 147 305 150 295

FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT# of Faculty Appointed 10 12 10 10 6

# of Faculty in Tenured Positions 116 113 106 95 95# of Faculty Departing** 3 2 6 2 0# of Faculty Retiring 4 7 8 4 5

Standard 5: Faculty(Rank, Fall Term)

Prior

Next YearForward (goal)

(FY 2017)

Current Year*

(FY 2013) (FY 2014) (FY 2015) (FY 2016) (FY 2017)

** Faculty categorized as "other" above are not included as "departing" faculty, as they are not considered "terminated" if they stop out of teaching for a term or more.


3 Years 2 Years 1 Year CurrentPrior Prior Prior Year

(FY 2013 ) (FY 2014 ) (FY 2015 ) (FY 2016 )



(FY 2012) (FY 2013) (FY 2014) (FY 2015) (FY 2016)Freshmen - Undergraduate

Completed Applications 3,279 3,328 2,948 3,139 3,200Applications Accepted 2,872 2,884 2,564 2,704 2,782Applicants Enrolled 1,553 1,505 1,446 1,381 1,348 % Accepted of Applied 87.6% 86.7% 87.0% 86.1% 86.9% % Enrolled of Accepted 54.1% 52.2% 56.4% 51.1% 48.5%

Percent Change Year over Year Completed Applications - 1.5% -11.4% 6.5% 1.9% Applications Accepted - 0.4% -11.1% 5.5% 2.9% Applicants Enrolled - -3.1% -3.9% -4.5% -2.4%Average of Statistical Indicator of Aptitude of Enrollees: (Define Below)

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Transfers - UndergraduateCompleted Applications 1,012 1,081 965 910 850Applications Accepted 774 834 751 674 638Applications Enrolled 484 489 472 378 351 % Accepted of Applied 76.5% 77.2% 77.8% 74.1% 75.1% % Enrolled of Accepted 62.5% 58.6% 62.8% 56.1% 55.0%

Master's DegreeCompleted Applications n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aApplications AcceptedApplications Enrolled n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a % Accepted of Applied % Enrolled of Accepted

First Professional Degree - All ProgramsCompleted Applications n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aApplications AcceptedApplications Enrolled n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a % Accepted of Applied % Enrolled of Accepted

Doctoral DegreeCompleted Applications n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aApplications AcceptedApplications Enrolled n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a % Accepted of Applied % Enrolled of Accepted

*Admissions data from the Fall Admissions Data Report (EER2) as reported to the DHE each fall


Standard 6: Students(Admissions, Fall Term)

Credit Seeking Students Only - Including Continuing Education



(FA 2012 ) (FA 2013 ) (FA 2014 ) (FA 2015 ) (FY 2016)UNDERGRADUATE

Full-Time Headcount 2,078 2,168 2,067 1,903 1,741 Part-Time Headcount 2,157 1,890 1,831 1,964 1,871 Total Headcount 4,235 4,058 3,898 3,867 3,612 Total FTE 2,802 2,803 2,682 2,562 2,369 Full-Time Headcount 803 761 759 597 544 Part-Time Headcount 1,166 1,083 1,061 887 842 Total Headcount 1,969 1,844 1,820 1,484 1,386 Total FTE 1,194 1,125 1,115 895 827 Full-Time Headcount 173 190 176 150 138 Part-Time Headcount 109 128 120 110 105 Total Headcount 282 318 296 260 243 Total FTE 210 233 216 187 173 Full-Time Headcount 23 29 32 14 13 Part-Time Headcount 28 32 23 33 31 Total Headcount 51 61 55 47 44 Total FTE 32 40 40 25 23

Unclassified Full-Time Headcount 0 0 0 0 0 Part-Time Headcount 0 0 0 0 0 Total Headcount 0 0 0 0 0 Total FTE 0 0 0 0 0

Total Undergraduate Students Full-Time Headcount 3,077 3,148 3,034 2,664 2,436 Part-Time Headcount 3,460 3,133 3,035 2,994 2,849 Total Headcount 6,537 6,281 6,069 5,658 5,285 Total FTE 4,239 4,200 4,053 3,669 3,392 % Change FTE Undergraduate n/a -0.9% -3.5% -9.5% -7.5%

GRADUATE n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Full-Time Headcount n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Part-Time Headcount Total Headcount Total FTE % Change FTE Graduate n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

GRAND TOTALGrand Total Headcount 6,537 6,281 6,069 5,658 5,285

Grand Total FTE 4,239 4,200 4,053 3,669 3,392 % Change Grand Total FTE n/a -0.9% -3.5% -9.5% -7.5%

FTE calculated using FT +.335737PT as per IPEDS

Credit-Seeking Students Only - Including Continuing Education

Standard 6: Students(Enrollment, Fall Census Date)

Associate degree-seeking with 30 or less accumulated credits

Associate degree-seeking with 31 or more accumulated credits

Certificate seeking with 30 or less accumulated credits

Certificate seeking with 31 or more accumulated credits



Standard 6: Students

(Financial Aid, Debt, and Developmental Courses) Where does the institution describe the students it seeks to serve? STCC 2015-2020 Student Success Plan

3 Years

Prior 2 Years Prior

Most Recently

Completed Year

Current Budget*

Next Year Forward

(goal)

Student Financial Aid

(FY 2013) (FY 2014) (FY 2015) (FY 2016) (FY 2017) Total Federal Aid

$22,265,695 $21,782,767 $20,392,742 $18,915,957 $17,968,411

Grants

$15,292,994 $15,493,529 $14,955,506 $14,261,571 $13,905,032

Loans

$6,738,806 $6,070,076 $5,247,034 $4,447,386 $3,864,778

Work Study

$233,895 $219,162 $190,202 $207,000 $198,601 Total State Aid

$3,352,184 $3,184,236 $3,110,010 $2,903,505 $2,772,847

Total Institutional Aid $900,000 $900,000 $975,000 $1,000,000 $1,050,000

Grants

$900,000 $900,000 $975,000 $1,000,000 $1,050,000

Loans

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Private Aid

$905,814 $994,025 $926,054 $900,000 $900,000

Grants

$643,646 $705,787 $625,261 $600,000 $600,000

Loans

$212,168 $288,238 $300,773 $300,000 $300,000

Student Debt

Percent of students graduating with debt**

Undergraduates 43% 44% 45% 46% 46%

For students with debt:

Average amount of debt for students leaving the institution with a degree

Undergraduates $7,739 $8,193 $7,703 $7,878 $7,878 Average amount of debt for students leaving the institution without a degree

Undergraduates $4,980 $4,850 $5,192 $5,007 $5,007

Percent of First-year students in Developmental Courses***

Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2014 Fall 2015 Fall 2016

English as a Second/Other Language 8% 1% 1% 2% n/a

English (reading, writing, communication skills) 40% 46% 45% 45% n/a

Math 60% 61% 61% 60% n/a Any

78% 73% 76% 74% n/a

No Dev. Courses 22% 27% 24% 26% n/a

3-year Cohort Default Rate (FY 2013) (FY 2014) (FY 2015)

Most recent three years 15.7% 16.0% 13.4%

* All students who graduated should be included in this calculation. **Courses for which no credit toward a degree is granted. ***"Current Budget" refers to the year in which the team visit occurs, or, if these forms are being completed in conjunction with an interim or

progress report, the year in which the report is submitted to the Commission.



FISCAL YEAR ENDS month &day: ( 06 / 30 )2 Years Prior

(FY 2013)1 Year Prior

(FY 2014)Most Recent Year (FY2015)

2 yrs-1 yr prior 1 yr-most recent

ASSETSCASH AND SHORT TERM INVESTMENTS $15,594,087 $15,556,922 $7,902,232 -0.2% -49.2%CASH HELD BY STATE TREASURER $2,795,593 $2,760,687 $2,794,929 -1.2% 1.2%DEPOSITS HELD BY STATE TREASURER $0 $0 $0 - -ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE, NET $4,157,210 $3,778,302 $5,399,979 -9.1% 42.9%CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVABLE, NET $0 $0 $0 - -INVENTORY AND PREPAID EXPENSES $0 $0 $0 - -LONG-TERM INVESTMENTS $10,273,375 $13,299,682 $17,810,474 29.5% 33.9%LOANS TO STUDENTS $0 $0 $0 - -FUNDS HELD UNDER BOND AGREEMENT $0 $0 $0 - -PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT, NET $26,862,668 $33,300,784 $41,177,649 24.0% 23.7% OTHER ASSETS $301,149 $315,686 $2,009,442 4.8% 536.5% TOTAL ASSETS $59,984,082 $69,012,063 $77,094,705 15.1% 11.7%

LIABILITIESACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND ACCRUED LIABILITIES $12,548,227 $12,902,577 $15,815,316 2.8% 22.6%DEFERRED REVENUE & REFUNDABLE ADVANCES $894,916 $1,276,108 $778,668 42.6% -39.0%DUE TO STATE $0 $0 $0 - -DUE TO AFFILIATES $0 $0 $0 - -ANNUITY AND LIFE INCOME OBLIGATIONS $0 $0 $0 - -AMOUNTS HELD ON BEHALF OF OTHERS $58,520 $57,386 $74,613 -1.9% 30.0%LONG TERM DEBT $2,122,804 $5,076,649 $9,930,095 139.1% 95.6%REFUNDABLE GOVERNMENT ADVANCES $0 $0 $0 - -OTHER LONG-TERM LIABILITIES $5,788 $254,166 $437,439 4291.3% 72.1%TOTAL LIABILITIES $15,630,255 $19,566,886 $27,036,131 25.2% 38.2%

NET ASSETSUNRESTRICTED NET ASSETS INSTITUTIONAL $36,718,320 $41,670,365 $39,943,443 13.5% -4.1% FOUNDATION ($398,234) ($450,237) ($452,738) 13.1% 0.6% TOTAL $36,320,086 $41,220,128 $39,490,705 13.5% -4.2%TEMPORARILY RESTRICTED NET ASSETS INSTITUTIONAL $192,598 $239,883 $255,903 24.6% 6.7% FOUNDATION $5,228,596 $5,825,331 $5,811,518 11.4% -0.2% TOTAL $5,421,194 $6,065,214 $6,067,421 11.9% 0.0%PERMANENTLY RESTRICTED NET ASSETS INSTITUTIONAL $0 $0 $0 - - FOUNDATION $519,541 $521,413 $502,464 0.4% -3.6% TOTAL $519,541 $521,413 $502,464 0.4% -3.6%TOTAL NET ASSETS $42,260,821 $47,806,755 $46,060,590 13.1% -3.7%TOTAL LIABILITIES AND NET ASSETS $57,891,076 $67,373,641 $73,096,721 16.4% 8.5%

Standard 9: Financial Resources

(Statement of Financial Position/Statement of Net Assets)

Percent Change


3 Years Prior (FY2013 )

2 Years Prior (FY2014 )

Most Recently

Completed Year

(FY 2015 )

Current Budget*

(FY 2016 )

Next Year Forward

(FY 2017 ) OPERATING REVENUES TUITION & FEES $25,483,280 $25,160,287 $23,949,565 $23,583,991 $23,348,151ROOM AND BOARD $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 LESS: FINANCIAL AID ($10,934,342) ($11,427,687) ($11,253,043) ($10,409,065) ($9,992,702) NET STUDENT FEES $14,548,938 $13,732,600 $12,696,522 $13,174,926 $13,355,449 GOVERNMENT GRANTS & CONTRACTS $21,785,595 $23,380,686 $24,970,398 $25,365,140 $25,872,443 PRIVATE GIFTS, GRANTS & CONTRACTS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 OTHER AUXILIARY ENTERPRISES $5,009,332 $5,489,535 $5,526,695 $5,360,001 $5,467,201ENDOWMENT INCOME USED IN OPERATIONS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0OTHER REVENUE (specify): Other Sources $576,272 $829,140 $799,432 $844,379 $850,000OTHER REVENUE (specify):Contribution Foundation $375,838 $205,034 $318,317 $325,000 $300,000NET ASSETS RELEASED FROM RESTRICTIONS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES $42,295,975 $43,636,995 $44,311,364 $45,069,446 $45,845,093

OPERATING EXPENSES INSTRUCTION $22,133,939 $22,847,358 $22,751,837 $23,434,392 $24,137,424 RESEARCH $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 PUBLIC SERVICE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ACADEMIC SUPPORT $7,245,878 $7,190,675 $7,435,183 $7,658,238 $7,887,985 STUDENT SERVICES $7,972,277 $8,520,309 $9,139,023 $9,413,194 $9,695,590 INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT $7,630,341 $8,472,538 $8,411,752 $8,619,515 $8,878,100FUNDRAISING AND ALUMNI RELATIONS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 OPERATION, MAINTENANCE OF PLANT (if not alloca $10,399,320 $7,983,856 $7,494,214 $7,719,040 $7,950,611 SCHOLARSHIPS & FELLOWSHIPS (Cash refunded by public institutions) $8,451,215 $8,318,833 $7,996,364 $7,396,637 $7,100,772 AUXILIARY ENTERPRISES $4,419,841 $5,116,406 $5,246,168 $5,182,437 $5,337,910 DEPRECIATION (if not allocated) $4,454,190 $5,143,091 $6,309,815 $6,510,966 $6,706,295OTHER EXPENSES (specify): $0 $0 $0 $0 $0OTHER EXPENSES (specify): $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES $72,707,001 $73,593,066 $74,784,356 $75,934,419 $77,694,687 CHANGE IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS ($30,411,026) ($29,956,071) ($30,472,992) ($30,864,973) ($31,849,594)

NON OPERATING REVENUESSTATE APPROPRIATIONS (NET) $26,172,702 $28,861,870 $30,209,095 $32,256,487 $33,527,440INVESTMENT RETURN $887,207 $1,787,822 $345,764 $425,000 $400,000INTEREST EXPENSE (public institutions) ($103,383) ($228,347) ($274,031) ($275,000) ($250,000)GIFTS, BEQUESTS & CONTRIBUTIONS NOT USED IN OPERATIONS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0OTHER (specify):ARRA Funds(2013); Mtg Ins./Debt Issuance Cost(2015) $132,263 $0 ($125,706) ($150,000) ($125,000)OTHER (specify):Loss on disposal of Asset $0 ($121,771) ($198,786) ($200,000) ($200,000)OTHER (specify):Asset disposal cost $0 ($667,647) ($794,698) ($625,000) ($600,000)NET NON OPERATING REVENUES $27,088,789 $29,631,927 $29,161,638 $31,431,487 $32,752,440INCOME BEFORE OTHER REVENUES EXPENSES, GAINS, OR LOSSES ($3,322,237) ($324,144) ($1,311,354) $566,514 $902,846 CAPITAL APPROPRIATIONS (public institutions) $3,553,367 $5,415,494 $2,969,165 $3,058,240 $3,149,987OTHER $0 $0 $0 $0 $0TOTAL INCREASE/DECREASE IN NET ASSETS $231,130 $5,091,350 $1,657,811 $3,624,754 $4,052,833

Standard 9: Financial Resources(Statement of Revenues and Expenses)

*"Current Budget" refers to the year in which the interim report is submitted to the Commission.


FISCAL YEAR ENDS month & day ( 06 / 30)

3 Years Prior (FY2013)


Most Recently Completed Year

(FY 2015) Current Budget*

(FY 2016)Next Year Forward

(FY 2017) DEBT

BEGINNING BALANCE $5,168,168 $5,094,030 $9,292,843 $8,982,798 $9,530,704ADDITIONS $87,210 $3,127,328 $76,881 $1,000,000 $0REDUCTIONS ($161,348) ($103,935) ($386,926) ($452,094) ($469,016)ENDING BALANCE $5,094,030 $8,117,423 $8,982,798 $9,530,704 $9,061,688INTEREST PAID DURING FISCAL YEAR ($103,383) ($228,327) ($274,031) ($275,000) ($250,000)

CURRENT PORTION $0 $108,197 $112,634 $117,252 $122,059BOND RATING

LINE(S) OF CREDIT: LIST THE INSTITUTION'S LINE(S) OF CREDIT AND THEIR USES.

FUTURE BORROWING PLANS (PLEASE DESCRIBE)

Standard 9: Financial Resources(Statement of Debt)


DEBT COVENANTS: (1) DESCRIBE INTEREST RATE, SCHEDULE, AND STRUCTURE OF PAYMENTS; and (2) INDICATE

Please refer to attached Audit of Financial Statements.

N/A


FISCAL YEAR ENDS month & day ( 06/30)



Recently

Completed Year

(FY 2015)

Current Budget* (FY 2016)

Next Year Forward (FY 2017)

NET ASSETS NET ASSETS BEGINNING OF YEAR $44,122,697 $42,260,821 $47,806,755 $46,060,590 $48,824,225TOTAL INCREASE/DECREASE IN NET ASSETS ($1,861,876) $5,545,934 ($1,746,165) $2,763,635 $2,929,454NET ASSETS END OF YEAR $42,260,821 $47,806,755 $46,060,590 $48,824,225 $51,753,679

FINANCIAL AIDSOURCE OF FUNDS

UNRESTRICTED INSTITUTIONAL $900,000 $950,000 $975,000 $1,000,000 $1,050,000FEDERAL, STATE & PRIVATE GRANTS $19,338,824 $19,383,552 $18,690,777 $17,765,076 $17,277,879RESTRICTED FUNDS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0TOTAL $20,238,824 $20,333,552 $19,665,777 $18,765,076 $18,327,879% DISCOUNT OF TUITION & FEES 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%% UNRESTRICTED DISCOUNT 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%


Standard 9: Financial Resources(Supplemental Data)

STCC Foundation does not have a spending policy

PLEASE INDICATE YOUR INSTITUTION'S ENDOWMENT SPENDING POLICY:


Standard 10: Public Disclosure

Information Web Addresses How can inquiries be made about the institution? Where can questions be addressed?


Notice of availability of publications and of audited financial statement or fair summary


Institutional catalog http://catalog.stcc.edu/

Obligations and responsibilities of students and the institution http://catalog.stcc.edu/content.php?catoid=12&navoid=2757

Information on admission and attendance http://www.stcc.edu/admissions/howtoapply.asp

Institutional mission and objectives http://www.stcc.edu/aboutstcc/

Expected educational outcomes http://catalog.stcc.edu/index.php?catoid=12

Status as public or independent institution; status as not-for-profit or for-profit; religious affiliation


Requirements, procedures and policies re: admissions

http://catalog.stcc.edu/content.php?catoid=12&navoid=2757#Admissions_Info_and_Policies

Requirements, procedures and policies re: transfer credit

http://catalog.stcc.edu/content.php?catoid=12&navoid=2757#Transfer_Credit_Policy

A list of institutions with which the institution has an articulation agreement

http://www.stcc.edu/coop/transferAffairs.asp

Student fees, charges and refund policies http://www.stcc.edu/studentaccounts/tuitionFees.asp

Rules and regulations for student conduct http://catalog.stcc.edu/content.php?catoid=12&navoid=2758

Procedures for student appeals and complaints

http://catalog.stcc.edu/content.php?catoid=12&navoid=2758#Student_Grievance_Procedures_-_Massachusetts_Community_Colleges

Other information re: attending or withdrawing from the institution

http://catalog.stcc.edu/content.php?catoid=12&navoid=2757#Course_Withdrawal

Academic programs http://catalog.stcc.edu/content.php?catoid=12&navoid=2790

Courses currently offered http://www.stcc.edu/schedules/

Other available educational opportunities

http://www.stcc.edu/adulteducationcenter/

http://www.stcc.edu/wd/

Other academic policies and procedures http://catalog.stcc.edu/content.php?catoid=12&navoid=2757

Requirements for degrees and other forms of academic recognition

http://catalog.stcc.edu/content.php?catoid=12&navoid=2757#Graduation_Policies


http://catalog.stcc.edu/

http://catalog.stcc.edu/content.php?catoid=12&navoid=2757

http://www.stcc.edu/admissions/howtoapply.asp


http://catalog.stcc.edu/index.php?catoid=12






http://www.stcc.edu/coop/transferAffairs.asp

http://www.stcc.edu/studentaccounts/tuitionFees.asp







http://www.stcc.edu/schedules/

http://www.stcc.edu/adulteducationcenter/

http://www.stcc.edu/wd/





Standard 10: Public Disclosure

Information Web Addresses List of current faculty, indicating department or program affiliation, distinguishing between full- and part-time, showing degrees held and institutions granting them

http://www.stcc.edu/directory/facultybios.aspx

Names and positions of administrative officers http://www.stcc.edu/directory/

Names, principal affiliations of governing board members


Locations and programs available at branch campuses, other instructional locations, and overseas operations at which students can enroll for a degree, along with a description of programs and services available at each location

n/a

Programs, courses, services, and personnel not available in any given academic year.

n/a

Size and characteristics of the student body http://www.stcc.edu/ir/quickfacts.asp

Description of the campus setting http://www.stcc.edu/aboutstcc/

Availability of academic and other support services

http://www.stcc.edu/studentservices/

Range of co-curricular and non-academic opportunities available to students


Institutional learning and physical resources from which a student can reasonably be expected to benefit


Institutional goals for students' education

See Program Goals in individual Program pages: http://catalog.stcc.edu/content.php?catoid=12&navoid=2790

Success of students in achieving institutional goals including rates of retention and graduation and other measure of student success appropriate to institutional mission. Passage rates for licensure exams, as appropriate

http://www.stcc.edu/ir/ Passage rates for licensure exams are found on Program Pages (e.g., Nursing, Clinical Laboratory Sciences, Physical Therapy Assisting)

Total cost of education, including availability of financial aid and typical length of study

http://www.stcc.edu/studentaccounts/tuitionfees.asp http://www.stcc.edu/finaid/ http://www.stcc.edu/finaid/DeterminingYourEligibility.asp https://www.aidcalc.com/stcc/#window_top

Expected amount of student debt upon graduation http://www.stcc.edu/finaid/Loans.asp

Statement about accreditation http://www.stcc.edu/aboutstcc/accreditation.asp

http://www.stcc.edu/directory/facultybios.aspx

http://www.stcc.edu/directory/


http://www.stcc.edu/ir/quickfacts.asp





http://www.stcc.edu/ir/

http://www.stcc.edu/studentaccounts/tuitionfees.asp

http://www.stcc.edu/finaid/

http://www.stcc.edu/finaid/DeterminingYourEligibility.asp

https://www.aidcalc.com/stcc/#window_top

http://www.stcc.edu/finaid/Loans.asp

http://www.stcc.edu/aboutstcc/accreditation.asp


Standard 11: Integrity

Policies Last Updated URL Where Policy is Posted Responsible Office or Committee

Academic honesty 08/2015 http://catalog.stcc.edu/content.php?catoid=12&navoid=2758

Student Affairs

Intellectual property rights n/a n/a n/a

Conflict of interest 12/2014 http://www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/ConflictOfInterestLaw.pdf

Human Resources

Privacy rights 08/2015 http://www.stcc.edu/registrar/privacypolicy.asp

Student Affairs

Fairness for students 08/2015 http://catalog.stcc.edu/content.php?catoid=12&navoid=2758

Student Affairs

Fairness for faculty 12/2014 www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/AffirmativeActionPlan.pdf

Human Resources

Fairness for staff 12/2014 www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/AffirmativeActionPlan.pdf

Human Resources

Academic freedom 7/2013 http://www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/AgreementMCCCDay.pdf

Human Resources

Drug Free Workplace 08/2015 http://www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/DrugFreeWorkplace.pdf

Human Resources

Domestic Violence Law 08/2015 http://www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/DomesticViolenceLaw.pdf

Human Resources

Non-discrimination policies

Recruitment and admissions 12/2014 www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/AffirmativeActionPlan.pdf

Human Resources

Employment 12/2014

www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/AffirmativeActionPlan.pdf http://www.stcc.edu/hr/employmentOp.asp

Human Resources

Evaluation 12/2014 www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/AffirmativeActionPlan.pdf

Human Resources

Disciplinary action 12/2014 www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/AffirmativeActionPlan.pdf

Human Resources

Advancement 12/2014 www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/AffirmativeActionPlan.pdf

Human Resources

Resolution of grievances

Students 08/2015 http://catalog.stcc.edu/content.php?catoid=12&navoid=2758 Student Affairs

Faculty 07/2013 http://www.stcc.edu/hr/laborContractInfo.asp Human Resources

Staff 07/2013, 07/2012

http://www.stcc.edu/hr/laborContractInfo.asp Human Resources



http://www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/ConflictOfInterestLaw.pdf

http://www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/ConflictOfInterestLaw.pdf

http://www.stcc.edu/registrar/privacypolicy.asp

http://www.stcc.edu/registrar/privacypolicy.asp



http://www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/AffirmativeActionPlan.pdf




http://www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/AgreementMCCCDay.pdf

http://www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/AgreementMCCCDay.pdf

http://www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/DrugFreeWorkplace.pdf

http://www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/DrugFreeWorkplace.pdf

http://www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/DomesticViolenceLaw.pdf

http://www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/DomesticViolenceLaw.pdf















http://www.stcc.edu/hr/laborContractInfo.asp





Standard 11: Integrity

Policies Last Updated URL Where Policy is Posted Responsible Office or Committee

Other Annual Security Report 10/2015

http://www.stcc.edu/police/crime_stats.asp

Campus Police

Title IX information 11/2015 http://stccnet.stcc.edu/faculty_staff_services/HREBOC/titleIX/Pages/default.aspx

Title IX Coordinator

Sexual Violence Victims Rights 10/2015

http://www.stcc.edu/hr/HRDocs/SexualViolenceVictimsRightsInformatioin.pdf

Title IX Coordinator



http://stccnet.stcc.edu/faculty_staff_services/HREBOC/titleIX/Pages/default.aspx







Appendix E. The E Series OPTION E1: PART A. INVENTORY OF EDUCATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS INDICATORS

CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these

learning outcomes published?

(please specify) Include URLs

where appropriate.

(3) Other than GPA, what

data/evidence is used to determine that graduates have achieved the stated outcomes for the degree?

(e.g., capstone course, portfolio review, licensure

examination)

(4) Who interprets the evidence?

What is the process? (e.g. annually by the

curriculum committee)

(5) What changes have been

made as a result of using the data/evidence?

(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general

education and each degree program)*

At the institutional level:

For general education if an undergraduate institution:

Yes SOAR Website Each summer a committee of faculty looks at one, sometimes more than one, core competency of the college. This Core Competencies Assessment Team (CCAT) scores student artifacts from across the college using a LEAP rubric.

College faculty on the CCAT interprets findings and suggests actions to work on during the academic year.

Last year the CCAT faculty recommended that an emphasis be placed on increasing our student’s ability to use evidence and data to support their ideas. This became the basis for the fall’s faculty professional development day and for a series of workshops to assist faculty as they try to increase the practice of this skill within their classes.

2015

List each degree program:

Accounting - ACCT.AS

Business Administration -

Yes Catalog Course Syllabi

ABC rates, individual course assignments and exams are used to evaluate outcomes. In addition, business faculty receives periodic feedback from transfer counselors and business faculty from the local four year colleges/universities in terms of how our business graduates are performing.

Individual course faculty members interpret the evidence for their own assignments and exams. Some faculty members use rubrics. Business faculty interprets and discusses the ABC rates at faculty department meetings semi-annually. In addition, the business faculty discusses our curriculum with our Business Advisory Board. They

Curriculum changes—we made changes in the math requirements in the BTCM degree. Statistics and Calculus are now required courses. Several changes were made to the Accounting degree. The course competencies for ACC-101 and ACC-102 were rewritten to reflect the STCC core competencies. In ACC-102, Professors Gervais, Belemjian,

2015

https://sites.google.com/a/stcc.edu/stcc-soars/



CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


BUSN.AS

Business Transfer - BTCM.AS

Entrepreneurship - ENTM.AS

Management - MANG.AS

Marketing - MRKT.AS

provide suggestions on what we should cover and emphasize on various topics including communications, decision making, time-management, and working in teams.

and Rondinelli now have students do a presentation of financial statement analysis. Student assignments in the following courses (ACC-101, ACC-102, ACC-210, ACC-260 FIN-101) include more group work, presentations, and current real-world situations to utilize critical thinking skills. Professor Thornton has added an emphasis on students “providing evidence” for their analysis of video case studies. Based on feedback from our Business Advisory Board, Professor Atwater has reduced the number of slides she uses to cover various topics in both Principles of Management and Business Ethics. Professor Rhoda Belemjian is serving on the Massachusetts Transfer Pathways Committee as the representative for the (School of Business) community colleges to discuss the issues related to transfer opportunities for all students


CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


statewide. This committee will identify foundation courses, build a pathway of courses that lists a sequence of courses to transfer, and provide a listing of competencies and skills needed toward earning a baccalaureate degree.

Architecture and Building Technology - ARBT.AS


Our Architecture & Building Technology not only has a capstone course but the entire program is strongly portfolio driven.

Our professional faculty (who have many years of professional experience) work with the students through the design process and, in the capstone course, work with the students in a self-directed final project. The final project is presented to a group of invited professionals, faculty and design students.

Every course in our program is reviewed on an annual basis and updated with new design/construction practices. Our annual Advisory Board meeting reviews, discusses, and makes recommendations as to best industry practices.

2014

Art - FINE.AA Yes Catalog

Program Brochure

Completion of courses needed for graduation, portfolio review

Department Chair interprets evidence each semester.

Curriculum changes, assignment changes at the course level, Learning outcomes for all courses were revised in the last year, and will be published soon.

2015




CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


Automotive Technology - AUTM.AS

Yes Catalog

Course Objectives/ Competencies Course Syllabi Program Brochure

Successful completion of hands on laboratory assignment sheets, which are used in 9 of 10 courses taught in the Automotive Curriculum. Earning Automotive Service Excellence (ASE) Certifications in 8 automotive areas. Final examinations ABC rates

Two program faculty and one professional staff review and update all laboratory assignment sheets at the conclusion of each semester. These assignment sheets are used to complete specific service procedures on over 40 training vehicles in our program. Contemporary training vehicles, diagnostic equipment and service procedures must be maintained in our laboratory, to meet the expectations of our graduate’s potential employers.

If real world automotive service procedures for a specific area change, we must reflect that change in both the lecture and lab. In recent years our Climate Control course was updated from 2 to 3 cr, reflecting a change of equipment because of environmental concerns. The Math prerequisite for the Certificate of Completion Program was increased to Mat-081. Developed and implemented the Intro to Auto Service course into the curriculum. A Driveline and 4x4 Operations course also developed and implemented into the curriculum as a result of increased 4 wheel and All wheel drive vehicles. Course credits increased for the Diesel Engine Technology course from 2 to 3 credits, reflecting increased sales and environmental concerns.

2015

Biology Transfer - Yes Catalog Course competencies Biology department We have and are in the process of 2015




CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


BIOL.AS Course Syllabi changing pre requisites

Biotechnology - BIOT.AS

Yes Catalog Self-Study Reports

On first question I could not figure out how to include that we have the overall program goals, which are listed on the web and I provided the link for. In addition we have program competencies developed in conjunction with MLSEC (MA Life Sciences Education Consortium) and industry partners. Published in internal reports and used for informing curriculum development. a. Hands on assessment of laboratory skills in BIO-164, BTC-264 and BIO-265 in particular. b. Transfer rates and Employment rates. We monitor graduate progress to assess both transfer rates and employment rates. I am currently developing a program graduate database to facilitate the ease of this process. c. Lab Assignments and Exams are continuously updated to reflect changes to the curriculum and to

a. Lisa Rapp, Program chair b. Annually by program faculty and Advisory Board c. External review by MLSEC (Massachusetts Life Sciences Education Consortium) every three years. Last endorsed Fall 2014.

a. Curricular changes: In the last four years, there have been curriculum changes to both the STCC Biotechnology AS degree program and the Biotechnology certificate program. These changes were designed both to better prepare students for direct employment by local companies, and also allow a more seamless transition from the certificate program to the AS program, and from the AS program to four year colleges and universities. These changes include the following: Significant curriculum revision of the certificate program in 2011 whereby four options were eliminated to create a more streamlined program that is better designed to match industry needs and more seamlessly fit with the A.S. program. Change of Introduction of Biotechnology course from 1 credit exploratory

2015



CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


assess program goals and competencies.

course (BIOT-151) to 4 credit lab course (BIO-164) emphasizing basic lab skills and GLP. This course is now a requirement for both the AS and certificate programs. Addition of CMPA-140 Career Preparation/Soft-skills course. This course is now a requirement for both the AS and certificate programs. Addition of new labs in BIO-164 and BIOT-264 including labs on solution prep, aseptic technique, insect cell culture, and use of a bioreactor to grow bacteria cells. The STCC Biotechnology program has ongoing discussions with colleagues at institutions where our students transfer. Approximately half of all program students do choose to transfer, and a majority of our transfer graduates choose to attend the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. We have two UMass representatives on our program


CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


advisory board, representing the two programs that our students choose - Microbiology and Molecular Biology and Biochemistry (MB&B). While we do not have a formal articulation agreement with UMass, we have a long term collaboration, and UMass currently accepts the vast majority of STCC Biotechnology program courses. At our last Advisory Board meeting we discussed transferability of STCC courses to the University of Massachusetts. Particularly the following courses: BIO-235 Microbiology, BIO-263 Genetics, BIO-164 Introduction to Biotechnology, BTC-264 Biotechnology, BIO-265 Cell Biology and OIT-140 Career Preparation and Soft-Skills. Both Molly Fitzgerald-Hayes (from MB&B program) and Shelley Thibodo (from Microbiology program) offered their assistance


CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


in facilitating transfer of courses and investigation of course equivalents. The STCC Biotechnology program also has had several program graduates transfer to Bay Path college in Longmeadow, MA. We have a long-standing articulation agreement with that school, whereby they do accept the majority of program courses when students transfer. I have also had discussions with representatives of Holyoke Community College, a neighboring community college, to see how our two colleges can work together to provide biotechnology training in Western Massachusetts. They have recently received funding for program expansion, and hired a new faculty member, Dr. Emily Rabinsky, who has reached out to STCC / STCC is also recently completed a course renumbering


CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


project to better align our course numbers with four year colleges and universities. Starting from the very first program course (BIO-164), employment readiness is emphasized. This course was redesigned as part of curriculum revision in 2012. In BIO-164, students have exposure to a wide variety of basic biotechnology lab skills and also to industry standards on good laboratory practice and documentation. Assessment of cover letter and resume writing has been introduced in the upper level biotechnology course (BIO-264) that students take in their last semester. After review of these documents all program students are required to apply for the MLSC (MA Life Sciences Center) internship challenge program. Students in this course are also introduced to our STCC Career Services office and its resources


CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


(http://www.stcc.edu/coop/career_resources.asp). Also during curriculum revision in 2012, we included a 1 credit course CMPA-140 (Career Preparation/Soft Skills) that is specifically designed to prepare students with the soft skills that are essential to long-term success in the workplace. Course Description: / b. Changes to laboratory portions of courses: i. Further emphasis on GLP (Good laboratory Practices) and GMP (Good Manufacturing practices) have been incorporated into BIO-164 and BTC-264 courses. These are now evaluated by both written assessments and also faculty graded rubrics assessing performance in lab. For example in fall 2015 I introduced a new rubric to assess GLP in the BIO-164 course. ii. Continuous updating of lab experiments to be sure we are meeting MLSEC program competencies and to

http://www.stcc.edu/coop/career_resources.asp

http://www.stcc.edu/coop/career_resources.asp


CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


reflect changes to current technology and industry needs.

Chemistry Transfer- CHEM.AS

Yes Catalog Assignments, Exams, ABC Rates Members of the department during department meetings. We try to reach consensus on things to do to improve retention and students' performance in our courses. We try as well to implement suggestions by our dean in order to reach those goals. Then, we implement the policies agreed upon in the next semester(s)

Course revisions (CHM 101, CHM 111, CHM 112, CHM 201, CHM 202).assignment changes (CHM 101, CHM 111, CHM 112), development of assignments prior to coverage of material in class to concentrate on subjects that give more trouble to students (CHM 101, CHM 111), on-line assignments that provide feedback (CHM 101, CHM 111, CHM 112), attendance monitoring (CHM 101, CHM 111). Each professor makes his/her office hours available not only to his/her students but also to students from other courses, we are looking at ways to have more and better one on one tutoring available to students in all our courses. Lab sessions specifically assigned to lectures such that students in a lecture are together in the lab session(s) (CHM 101,

2015



CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


CHM 111, CHM 112, CHM 201, CHM 202).

Computer & IT Security - CITS.AS

Programmer - PROG.AS

Yes Catalog

Word Documents that we have been working on.

In CIT we are planning on using ABC rates, transfer rates to 4 year schools, graduation surveys and Advisory board input. For the Security Majors, CITS.AS, there is a capstone course CIT-252 we are re-evaluating the final project to see if we can make/tweak it to become a capstone project. For the Programming Majors, PROG.AS, in the CIT-116 Mobile Programming course we are proposing as a capstone project the students will create a mobile phone app as a capstone project, document the project and offer if for download on the Google Play store front.

The CIT department will evaluate the data and review with the CIT Advisory Board and solicit input from them. CIT envisions reviewing the data during Departmental Meetings and then present to the Advisory Board during the meetings in April of each year. Based on the feedback we will consider changing the curriculum.

Most changes have not been fully made yet. However, we did make course level changes to CIT-121 Windows 2 and CIT-250 Security 1 to align with the course competencies. In the CIT-131 UNIX 2 class the final capstone research project has been revised several times to have Stated Learning Outcomes clearly detailed and examples of what is needed/strongly suggested is listed. In addition the Network courses CIT-160 Networks 1, CIT-161 Networks 2 and CIT-162 Networks 3 are being reworked to clearly delineate the course competencies from each course and to clearly indicate what the Stated Learning Outcomes are.

2015

Computer Science Transfer - CSCI.AS

Yes Catalog Transfer Rate / Projects / Exams Monthly at Department meetings Modified the content of CSC-100 to meet UMASS and WNEU requirements. Almost the entire

2015




CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


Course Syllabi Annually by program Faculty class transfer to either UMASS or WNEU.

Computer Systems Engineering Technology - CSET.AS

Yes Catalog Course Syllabi Program Brochure

Students can sit for the Cisco CCNA certification. Students pass four Cisco academy courses that are assessed by the Cisco academy program. Each CSET course has minimum requirements for a passing grade. The outcomes for the program are assessed in the various CSET courses and become part of the grade for that course.

The CSET faculty meet twice each semester and discuss issues related to student outcomes. These discussions might center on the need to change or modify outcomes or the need to modify courses so that the students are more successful in meeting the outcomes. The CSET program also has an Industrial Advisory Board (IAB) that provides input to the program in terms of the program outcomes.

The CSET program is constantly changing its curriculum to keep up with the rapidly changing field of computer software (operating systems) and computer networking. The changes to the program involve what operating systems are taught, what server software is taught, what programming languages are taught and so forth. This past year CSET added a new course, The Internet of Everything, to keep up with the shift in the industry.

2015

Construction Management - CNST.AS

Yes Catalog

Course Syllabi Curriculum Sheets

Students in the Civil Engineering department take the Concrete Testing License exam, advisory board meetings for the relevancy of the curriculum, feedback from past employers, and students giving feedback once they are in

Departmental faculty will continually modify the curriculum. to keep pace with the industry

The program will be adding a course in BIM, the Project Management course is including computerized cost estimating, added Civil 3D as a pre-req for Surveying.

2014




CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


the industry.

Criminal Justice - LECJ.AS

Yes Catalog A Multi-departmental Committee has been discussed to review case studies, journals, and portfolios prepared by students in various courses. The departments represented are: Sociology, Psychology, and English in addition to Criminal Justice. The committee would meet once a semester and review the work of pending graduates the course material reviewed will be from courses: ENG-104, Technical Report, Writing, CRJ-200 and 201, Criminal Law I and II, CRJ-210, Criminal investigation, and CRJ-140 Interpersonal Communication Criminal Justice. The department is also presently considering Capstone for fourth semester and/or graduation students. This would include using and evaluating material learned from most criminal justice courses and other required courses in the

Currently, evidence of each class is interpreted for that class by the individual instructors. It is the hope to use the results obtained in these classes at department meetings. Our Advisory Board includes members of local four year institutions that provide feedback as to competency level of our students transferring to those institutions.

The Advisory Board of the Criminal Justice Program met May 9th, 2013. A motion was made, seconded, and passed unanimously to remove the restriction to CRJ-101, Introduction to Criminal Justice. The removal will not allow STCC student to enroll in this first semester class, not just Criminal Justice students. The Criminal Justice Department is conducting a review of the curriculum to determine if the course sequence should be altered. A course for Corrections is also under consideration. Currently the Board of Higher Education is trying to have the two year college and the four year institutions develop the process to allow students to make the transfer process easier. It is anticipated that there will be some changes in curriculum and

2015



CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


Criminal Justice program. sequence. Our Advisory Board has recommended placing an emphasis on critical thinking and the improvement of criminal justice specific writing skills.

Digital Audio Broadcasting - DAUD.AS

Interactive Media and Animation Design Technology - MLTD.AS

TV Production Technology - TPRD.AS

Yes Catalog

Course Syllabi

We have both a capstone course (DMP-212); and a Portfolio course (DMP-245) In both of the courses student need to demonstrate that they have accumulated knowledge from the 2 year course sequence. The capstone course has writing; production; editing; functioning in group dynamics and presentation components.

Department Co-Chairs do most interpretation in weekly informal meetings throughout the semester; student learning in also discussed at monthly faculty meetings, but more formal review is done at the annual Advisory Board meeting. Department Chairs make syllabi available for review; we show student work; we get feedback from internships. This gives us evidence as to whether we are teaching students what they need to learn in the digital media field; and also whether they are performing once they are in work place situations.

We have updated software programs in many courses to reflect what is more common in the field - as it changes quite often. Some examples: (DMP-150 continually upgrades to newest Final Cut Pro release); (DMP-250 now using 'Smoke'); (DMP-253 now using 'Maya'); some changes are in discussion now as we may move away from the Adobe Suite. Cost is a factor in these decisions - so haven't made a final decision yet. We have added a degree option in Broadcast Audio to fill a need in that area of expertise. We have updated the multimedia degree option to a new title "Interactive Media and Animation Design" to keep up with changes

2015



CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


and expectations for degrees in that field. The name change also reflects student interest in animation and game design. Much of this is ongoing as the Digital Media field changes quickly. That is why we talk almost weekly about courses and content and goals for student learning as we try to keep up with the changes in the field.

Digital Photography - DPHO.AS

Graphic Design - CART.AS

Yes Course Syllabi

Curriculum Sheets

Department meeting and also division meetings

Department meeting and also division meetings

Courses have been changed in some higher level photography and graphic design courses. We have up-dated competencies with photography and graphic design courses. GAT-261 revised electronic publishing. GAT-260 revised course.

2015

Early Childhood Education - CHLD.AS

Yes Catalog The ECE department plans to review student work from all ECE courses at the end of Spring 2016 to assess the use of evidence to support decisions.

Department faculty at department meetings.

The ECE department has been using assessment data to revise its course and program outcomes, sequence of courses offered, and course descriptions to better

2015



CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


meet the needs of its students

Electrical Engineering Technology - ELEC.AS


Employers continue to come back year after year looking for our graduates.

Results are mentioned in Advisory Board meetings held in May of each year.

Results are mentioned in Advisory Board meetings held in May of each year.

2015

Energy Systems Technology - ENGY.AS


Job placement, examination, mass oil burner license, and EPA certification.

Advisory board meeting (biannually)

Change of courses Pre requisites, equipment upgrade, text books, and syllabi

2015

Engineering Transfer - ENGR.AS


Projects and Transfer rates Annually by Program Faculty and monthly by faculty at department meeting

We added a new class (EGR-122) and a Lab (EGR-219L) and deleted a lab from another course ((EGR-230) to match other 4-year colleges and universities. We also changed the content of CSC-100 to match UMASS and WNEU

2015

Fire Protection and Safety Technology - FIRE.AS

Yes Course Syllabi The faculty are area Fire Chiefs who are constantly changing the up-dating the material in their courses. The program has a long history with the area Fire Departments who will give constant feedback

The faculty in the department meet and will make adjustments as necessary

The faculty will make changes in the individual coursework, The curriculum has not changed but the material in the courses has changed.





CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


General Studies - LTGS.AA

Liberal Arts Transfer - LTTR.AA

Pre-Engineering and Science Transfer - ENGS.AA

Pre-Health/Health Sciences - HTHC.AA

University Without Walls - UWWL.AA

Yes Catalog Each STCC department and program focuses on one particular outcome each year and assesses its students in this area. However, this data is not disaggregated by major. In addition, the Core Competencies Assessment Team (CCAT) assesses one of the college’s core competencies each year across divisions and departments. However, this data is not disaggregated by major.

Annually at professional development day.

Individual departments and programs have used assessment data for specific changes; the college-wide CCAT-generated data has been instrumental in college-wide adjustments, including an emphasis on evidence-based decision making across divisions and departments.

2015

Health Information Technology - HIIM.AS

Yes Catalog

Course Syllabi

MCBS program - students are prepped to take a national coding exam Certified Coding Associates (CCA) through AHIMA (American

The HIT faculty interprets and reports this information to AHIMA (CAHIIM) this will be yearly, our advisory board annually, monthly

MCBS - curriculum has been changed to meet the needs of employers. HIIM - fairly new program, there has been some

2015




CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


Medical Coding and Billing Specialist - MCBS.A

Health Information Management Association), those with a 3.0 or better also can participate in an internship. ABC rates are very high for all HIT courses. Students are required to achieve a "C" or better in all HIT, MED and BIO courses in order to graduate HIIM program - this is a closed program and is currently under review for accreditation with CAHIIM, a subsidiary of AHIMA. There are strict outcomes for all courses in this program. Each established Domain contains knowledge clusters and each of these knowledge clusters are mapped to an assignment, project, test or quiz. Students participate in a Professional Practice Experience and also prep to take a national certification exam Registered Health Information Technician (RHIT) through AHIMA. ABC rates are also high for this program, other outcomes such as

as needed at department meetings, at Chair meetings as needed.

revision as a result of feedback from the reviewers at CAHIIM, once accreditation has been achieved, we are committed to maintain a relevant and update to program based on the needs of our students, employers and CAHIIM


CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


graduation rates, pass rate of the RHIT exam, job placement rates must be maintained and reported to AHIMA yearly. We are also required to follow up with recent graduates, employers via a survey. All courses require a "C" or better to pass. All knowledge clusters must be a certain level of Bloom's taxonomy.

Landscape Design and Management Technology - LAND.AS

Landscape Design and Management Technology Transfer - LANT.AS

Yes Catalog

Course Syllabi

Most of our core courses require the students to assemble a portfolio, presentation of a landscape design, plant science project, or show competency in constructing with materials such as stone, concrete, or unit paving materials. Students must show they have learned basic communication skills (presenting ideas in a public forum, research papers etc.

The faculty interprets the evidence. For design and skills presentations, the student's capstone projects carry a more significant percentage of their overall grade valuations. Students are given more time to complete presentation projects and capstone projects than for other projects during the semester.

Our faculty often makes changes on our approaches in presenting course information. Course goals and objectives are stated on every syllabus. Based on past experiences, and 'in flight' experiences, we feel we are equipped with the knowledge and experience to adjust our delivery methods, and assessment methods, to best suit the students. We meet annually with our advisory committee. Our committee is most helpful in communicating what practices are being employed in the profession.

2015



CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


We receive feedback on the preparedness of our graduates and student interns that helps us to confirm or suggest that we focus more or less on the goals and objectives in our curriculum.

Laser Electro-Optics Technology - LEOT.AS


The LEOT department depends on the successful completion of the required program courses as its primary measure of whether or not the program objectives have been met. These program courses address the program objectives and assess the same. Also, each senior student participates in an internship with local industry. These internships are closely coupled to the student's senior project and are closely monitored by program faculty and the participating industry company. Feedback from the LEOT Industrial Advisory Board (IAB) and industry representatives from companies with interns provide very useful information regarding

The LEOT faculty meet twice a semester and discuss issues involving student outcomes and industry feedback. There is also a yearly IAB meeting that provides evidence of achievement (or lack of) by the programs graduates.

The LEOT program is always responsive to the IAB and makes curricula changes as needed. The LEOT program recently added MET-160 Engineering Graphics with Solid Works, as a requirement for the program.

2015



CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


the student’s achievement of the program outcomes.

Mathematics Transfer - MATH.AS


Transfer Rate Assignments Examinations

Annually by program Faculty Monthly by Faculty meetings

Created extended day Dev Ed math Reevaluated pre requisites for statistics Discussing the possibility of pre statistics

2015

Medical Office Administrative Assistant- MOAA.AS

Professional Office Administrative Assistance - POAA.AS

Yes Catalog Curriculum Sheets

Program Brochure

Students have the option of completing an internship, and the supervisor completes a performance evaluation. Students also complete our capstone course--Microsoft Office Certification. Students are encouraged to take the Microsoft Office Specialist certification exam. Students also complete a series of lab assignments which are framed in a workplace project perspective. Students are required to create a portfolio in some courses.

Faculty who teach the upper-level courses require students to complete documents that meet industry standards. Faculty coordinator reviews the student's performance evaluation at the conclusion of the internship. Faculty meet annually to interpret the evidence.

Curriculum changes included new degree programs--Professional Office Administrative Assistant and Medical Office Administrative Assistant. New courses added include Basic Technology, Career Preparation/Soft Skills. Faculty incorporated testing and training assessment software (SNAP) in computer application courses (Word, Excel, Access, & PowerPoint).

2015

Physics Transfer - PHYS.AS

No Catalog Course Syllabi

Transfer Rate Assignments Exams and Projects

Annually by Program Faculty Monthly by Faculty at

Added Physics 3 (PHY-233) to the curriculum. We are in the process of creating a new class to be





CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


Department meetings taught by Physics, Engineering and Chemistry professors

Pre Med/PreDent/

PreVet Transfer - MDVT.AS


Transfer Rate, Exams and Assignments

Annually by program Faculty / Monthly by Faculty at Department meetings

We are in the process of creating a new course to give the students a solid foundation in Math and science. This course will be tough jointly by Engineering, Physics and Chemistry Professors

Project Management - PMGT.AS


The Project Management Option is requires demonstration of competency through discussion, oral and written presentations and portfolio review.

The current faculty interprets the evidence.

The departmental curriculum is reviewed and updated on an annual basis, with approximately 10% of course material being updated or replaced on an annual basis.

2014

Teacher Education Transfer - Elementary - EDEL.AA

Teacher Education Transfer - Secondary - EDSE.AA


Due to the high level of cheating with papers/projects, I use class quizzes, participation, etc. for the secondary and elementary education transfer students. The information from these indicators are run through item analysis to see where students are doing well and where there needs to be

The teachers in the department interpret the data. Also, other colleges in the area are reaching out to take our students even prior to receiving degrees. This unfortunately lowers our graduation rates but we must be doing something right. Also, our students are being offered scholarships (Ada Comstock, etc.).

We see a need to offer a BA degree program in education. We constantly change texts, use new methodology for instruction. This has occurred in both the Foundations in Education and Introduction to Special Needs courses. Students from other colleges have come here to take our courses as they do not get

2015





CATEGORY

(1) Have formal

learning outcomes

been developed?

(2) Where are these



where appropriate.




examination)






(6) Date of most

recent program

review (for general


some clarification. We have made annual visits to Westfield State University to maintain on-going articulation.

offered at their institutions or they are poorly done.

Technical Engineering Transfer - TECH.AS


Projects and Transfer rates Annually by Program Faculty and monthly by faculty at department meeting

We added a new class (EGR-122) and a Lab (EGR-219L) and deleted a lab from another course ((EGR-230) to match other 4-year colleges and universities. We also changed the content of CSC-100 to match UMASS and WNEU

2015

Telecommunication Technology - TCOM.AAS

Yes Catalog Course Syllabus

This program does not presently have any student. The degree was created for the Verizon NextStep program. There have been no graduates of this program for the last 2 years. We have not offered any of the second year courses for at least the last three years.

N/A N/A

Institutions selecting E1a should also include E1b. *Date of latest SOAR report




OPTION E1: PART B. INVENTORY OF SPECIALIZED AND PROGRAM ACCREDITATION

(1) Professional, specialized, State, or programmatic

accreditations currently held by the institution (by agency

or program name).

(2) Date of most recent accreditation action

by each listed agency.

(3) List key issues for continuing

accreditation identified in accreditation action letter or report.

(4) Key performance indicators as

required by agency or selected by program (licensure, board, or bar

pass rates; employment rates, etc.). *

(6) Date and nature

of next scheduled

review.

Civil Engineering Technology - CIVL.AS

Accredited by the ETAC Accreditation Commission of ABET

2014 - accreditation Adhere to the Program’s most recent Self Study Report for ETAC of ABET Reaccreditation Follow ABET Accreditation Policy and Procedure Manual

Student learning outcomes Program outcomes Graduate competencies Retention Rates

2016 Reaccreditation (A review was completed in 2015)

Cosmetology - COSM.CRT

MA Board of Cosmetology, Division of Professional Licensure

2009 – accreditation

2015 – annual visit

School File Update: copies of all curricula; list of equipment; number of students; list of books in library; copies of all instructor licenses; number of instructors on floor; copy of floor plan

Clock hours

Hair, skin & nail competencies

Theory Hours

Course and clock hours to include all mandated areas

MA State Board practical and written test 1987 through 2015 100% passing both written and practical Clock hours monthly

End of year report status of graduates

Spontaneous State Inspector visit on site intermittingly Board request meeting in Boston, once or twice yearly Overview of testing/licensing process, recent changes, review of examination, registration and administration procedures

Annual Visits – Next one in 2016




or program name).








(6) Date and nature

of next scheduled

review.

Dental Assisting - DAST.CRT

Commission on Dental Accreditation (CODA) American Dental Association

2012 - Accreditation Maintain adherence to CODA standards CDA – Certified Dental Assistants Examination in: Chairside Assisting, Radiation Health and Safety, and Infection Control Pass rate for the last 5 years on the CDA Examination Employer satisfaction surveys Graduate satisfaction surveys Employment rates

2019 - Accreditation

Dental Hygiene - DHYG.AS

Commission on Dental Accreditation (CODA)

2012 - Accreditation Recommended that biomedical science include content in chemistry program. Action: CHEM 110 was made a pre-requisite course; applicants must have achieved a final grade of C or better to be considered for admission into the Dental Hygiene

Recommended that students demonstrate competency in providing treatment to patients that are classified as having periodontal disease. Action: Students are required to complete a set number of patients that have all classifications of periodontal disease.

Student learning outcome/competencies Student retention rates Graduation rates CODA standards NBDHE passing rates Program outcomes CDCA passing rates Employment rates Employer satisfaction surveys





or program name).








(6) Date and nature

of next scheduled

review.

Electronic Systems Engineering Technology - ESET.AS

ABET accreditation of the Electronic Systems Engineering Technology (ESET) program

2015 - accreditation The program review rated the program’s compliance with ABET Criteria 4 as a weakness. The program must show that it is using its documented process to regularly assess its student outcomes and to evaluate the extent to which they are being obtained and that the results of these evaluations are being used to effect continuous improvement of the program.

Student Learning Outcomes Written report due 2016

Next accreditation: 2017

Mechanical Engineering Technology - MECH.AS

ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology)

2015 - accreditation Develop and implement a process to regularly and systematically identify assessment activities and collect data for all MET evening courses. Develop and implement a Program Outcome assessment process focusing on skills specific to MET.

Student learning outcomes Program outcomes Employer surveys Student enrollment and graduation data

2016

Medical Assistant - MAST.COC/MAST.AS

CAAHEP (Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs) upon recommendation by MAERB (Medical Assisting Education Review Board)

2006 - accreditation N/A

We were given full accreditation with maximum number of years; 10 years. Currently preparing for site visit in 3/2016

Most recent “outcomes threshold” requirements: 1. Program Retention equal or greater than 60% 2. Positive Job Placement equal or greater than 60% 3. Graduate Survey Participation equal or greater than 30% 4. Graduate Survey Satisfaction equal or greater than 80% 5. Employer Survey Participation equal or greater that 30%

Self-Study submitted 2015 Site Visit 2016




or program name).








(6) Date and nature

of next scheduled

review.

6. Employer Satisfaction Rate equal or greater than 80% 7. National Credentialing Participation Rate equal or greater than 30% 8. National Credentialing Passage Rate equal or greater than 60%

Medical Laboratory Technician - CLLS.AS

National Accrediting Agency for Clinical Laboratory Science (NAACLS)

2015 - accreditation No actions identified Graduation Rates,

Certification Rates, Employment/Placement Rates

2021 Program Self-study, Evaluation and Site Visit

Nursing - NURS.AS

Accreditation Commission for Education in Nursing (ACEN) Board of Registration in Nursing (BORN)

2014 accreditation

2015 annual report approval

All Standards met. No actions

All requirements met.

Student learning outcomes/competencies Student retention rates Program outcomes ACEN Standards Graduation rates NCLEX passing rates Employment rates Employer satisfaction surveys

Next ACEN site visit 2022.

Next full BORN program approval report due 2022. Annual report approval due 2016.




or program name).








(6) Date and nature

of next scheduled

review.

Occupational Therapy Assistant - OCCP.AS

Accreditation Council for Occupational Therapy Education (ACOTE)

2011 —Granted 10 year Accreditation Status

2015 – Interim Accreditation Report

Non-compliance of Standards A.4.2, A.5.3, A.6.7, B.1.8, B.5.3, B.5.17, B.5.18 and Revision of publication of program outcomes, program evaluation and curriculum design. Documentation of assessment of student’s use of technology, therapeutic use of occupation, exercises and activities, home and community programming, health literacy and effective inter-professional work in course syllabi.

B.5.21Plan of Correction Non-compliance of Standards B.10.9 and B.10.10 Documentation that both parties review and sign ongoing clinical education agreements every 5 years.

Plan of Correction submitted, awaiting response

Plan of Correction and Progress Reports submitted and accepted

February 2016 ACOTE meeting Self-Study Report and On-site visit 2021




or program name).








(6) Date and nature

of next scheduled

review.

Physical Therapist Assistant - PTAS.AS

Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education (CAPTE)

2007 – site visit

2008 – accreditation

2009 – Summary of Action following review of Feb. 2009 progress report

1. Cited graduation rate as more than 1 standard deviation below average 30 year rate of all programs nationally. Accreditation reaffirmed: 2. a. consistency in nondiscrimination statements 2. b. Policy and procedure for complaints outside due process 2. c. Delineation of responsibility for patient care in affiliation agreement 2.d. Linkage between faculty assessment and action based on assessment 2.e. Identification of clinical educator activities provided by program 2. f Clarification of admissions process 2. g. Publication of School of Health lab fee 2. h. Activities to improve graduation rate 2. i. Consistency in weighting didactic and laboratory course components 2. k. Revision of some course objectives for clarity 2. I. Assessment process includes measurable outcomes to trigger action of not met 2. m. Assessment process and changes are based on measurable outcomes. 2.a. Faculty development plans derived from assessment process and based on

Graduation rate Licensure exam pass rate Acceptance rate Employment rate 6 months post-grad

2017 – Self-study and on-site review





or program name).








(6) Date and nature

of next scheduled

review.

performance needs 2.b. Measurable outcomes to trigger action in certain areas 2. c. Examples of program changes based on data collection process

Radiography - DMIR.AS

Joint Review Committee on Education in Radiologic Technology (JRCERT)

Interim report 2016 Maintained compliance with relevant accreditation standards set by JRCERT.

2014 ARRT registry exam pass rate. Pass rate 75% (9 out of 12 students passed exam on 1st try within 6 months of graduation)

Full review with site visit 2020

Respiratory Care - RSPC.AS

Commission on Accreditation for Respiratory Care (CoARC)

2006 - accreditation 2015 – self-study submitted

Maintain adherence to CoARC Standards Assessment Thresholds must be met: Entry level exam pass rate 2015 graduates 100% Advanced RRT level 100% Attrition below CoARC threshold Graduate, Employer, Student, Faculty Surveys, 2014 reported at or above the cut score

2016




or program name).








(6) Date and nature

of next scheduled

review.

Sonography - DMIS.AS

American Medical Association’s Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs (CAAHEP) via its Joint Review Committee on Diagnostic Medical Sonography (JRCDMS) for a “general ultrasound concentration”

2009 - accreditation Maintain adherence to JRCDMS standards Student learning outcome (Students must achieve a minimum grade of “C” (73%) in each Diagnostic Medical Sonography course and in the math, health science and science courses required by the program. Program outcome (Advisory board meeting and annual survey) Graduate competencies (To meet all other A.R.D.M.S prerequisites to apply to take the SPI, ABD, OB/GYN exams and their pass rate, Employment rate, etc.) *Class 2013 Credentialing 100% Attrition 20%

Employment 88%

2016 Annual report has been submitted. Self-study will be submitted prior to site visit

Surgical Technology - SURG.AS

American Medical Association’s Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs (CAAHEP)

2015 - accreditation Curriculum: Clinical case logs do not meet standards. Action: Clinical case logs have been revised to meet standards.

Outcomes reporting: Graduate and Employer Survey return rates did not consistently meet threshold. Action: We are following up the surveys with phone calls or visits to the agencies.

Programs resources: It was not clear the Program Director is sufficiently free from

Certification Exam now mandated in Mass. /Effective July, 2013 (Pass rates; 2103=100%, 2014=100% 2015=92%)

2025, Accreditation Review




or program name).








(6) Date and nature

of next scheduled

review.

teaching responsibilities to administer the program. Action: We are looking to appoint a Clinical Coordinator in the near future.

Student Records: Maintenance of student health records was resubmitted by Jonathan Miller. We are now in compliance.

*Record results of key performance indicators in form S3.


Appendix F. The S Series

Form S1. RETENTION AND GRADUATION RATES

Student Success Measures/

Prior Performance and Goals

3 Years Prior

2 Years Prior

1 Year Prior

Most Recent

Year

Goal for 2015

IPEDS Retention Data Fall to fall

First-time IPEDS Cohort 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

FT 58% 65% 61% 63%

PT 46% 43% 41% 43%

IPEDS Graduation Data – 150% time

Cohort 2009 2010 2011 2012

First-time-Full time IPEDS Cohort 17% 21% 20% 22%

Associate degree students 14% 18% 18% 20%

Other Undergraduate Retention Rates

Achieving the Dream Cohort (1) 2012 2013 2014 2015

Fall to spring

All students 76% 75% 76%

Full-time 81% 79% 83%

Part-time 69% 67% 65%

Fall to fall

All students 54% 56% 56%

Full-time 61% 61% 60%

Part-time 45% 49% 48%

Other Undergraduate Graduation Rates

Achieving the Dream Cohort 2009 2010 2011 2012


Full and Part-time 3-yr grad rate 15% 17% 19% 20%

Transferred 17% 18% 15% 16%

Still enrolled 16% 15% 15% 13%

Overall Persistence 48% 50% 48% 49%

Full-time 3-yr grad rate 19% 24% 24% 25%




Part-time 3-yr grad rate 9% 7% 9% 11%




National Student Clearinghouse Cohort (2) 2007 2008 2009

Full-time 6-yr rate 47% 51%

Part-time 6-yr rate 21% 19%

Mixed 6-yr rate 29% 34%

Achieving the Dream Cohort

Full-time 6-yr rate 35% 30% 30%

Part-time 6-yr rate 20% 15% 18%

Mixed 6-yr rate 30% 25% 26%

Graduate programs *

Retention rates first-to-second year (3) n/a n/a n/a


Graduation rates @ 150% time (4) n/a n/a n/a

Distance Education

FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015

Course completion rates (5) 82% 76% 73% 79%

Retention rates (6) n/a n/a n/a n/a

Graduation rates (7) n/a n/a n/a n/a

Branch Campus and Instructional Locations

Course completion rate (8) n/a n/a n/a n/a

Retention rates (9) n/a n/a n/a n/a

Graduation rates (10) n/a n/a n/a n/a

Definition and Methodology Explanations

1 Achieving the Dream (ATD) Cohort is defined as all degree or certificate-seeking students who enrolled for the first time at Springfield Technical Community College in the given fall term. This includes full- and part-time students first-time-in-college or transfer students.

2 National Student Clearinghouse cohort includes all full-time or part-time, first-time-in-college, degree-seeking students.

3 n/a

4 n/a

5 Course completion rates for distance education reflect known course outcomes at the time of reporting. For years before FY15, known outcomes were < 100% due to time of reporting relative to summer grades. Starting FY15, all outcomes from summer are included at time of report.

6 n/a

7 n/a

8 n/a

9 n/a

10 n/a

* An institution offering graduate degrees must complete this portion.


Form S2. OTHER MEASURES OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND SUCCESS

Measures of Student Achievement and Success/ Institutional Performance and Goals

3 Years Prior

2 Years Prior 1 Year Prior Most Recent Year (201_ )

Goal for 201_

Success of Students Pursuing Higher Degree

1

2

3

4


Rates at Which Graduates Pursue Mission-Related

Paths (e.g., Peace Corps, Public Service Law)

1

2

3

4


Rates at Which Students Are Successful in Fields

for Which They Were Not Explicitly Prepared


1

2

3

4


Documented Success of Graduates Achieving Other

Mission-Explicit Achievement (e.g., Leadership,

Spiritual Formation)

1

2

3


Other (Specify Below)

1

2



Form S3. LICENSURE PASSAGE AND JOB PLACEMENT RATES

3 Years Prior

(2012)

2 Years Prior (2013)

1 Year Prior (2014)

Most Recent Year (2015 )

Goal for 2016

State Licensure Passage Rates *

1

2

3

National Licensure Pass Rates*

1 Nursing RN (NCLEX)a 87% 88%

2

Medical Laboratory Technician - National MLT Certification Examinationb 100% 100% 88%

3 National PTA Licensure Examinationc 100% 100% 100%

4

National Certification Examination (Occupation Therapy Assistant)d 78% 83% 100% 100%

5`

American Registry of Radiologic Technologist (ARRT)e 75%

6 Respiratory Care Certification Examf 100% 100% 100% 100%


7 Medical Assisting Certification Examg 88.9% 75% 90.9%

8 CAAHEP (Sonography) – ABh 100% 100% 100%

9 CAAHEP (Sonography) – OBi 100% 89% 100%

10 EAM (Surgical Tech) 100% 100% 90%

11

Dental Assisting (ICE, RHS, GC, CDA combined) 100% 100% 82.6% 100%

* For each licensure exam, give the name of the exam above along with the number of students for whom scores are available and the total number of students eligible to take the examination (e.g. National Podiatric Examination, 12/14). In following columns, report the passage rates for students for whom scores are available, along with the institution's goals for succeeding years.

Institutional Notes of Explanation

a NCLEX Source: First-time test takers. Source: Massachusetts Board of Registration in Nursing, Nation Council of State Boards of Nursing as reported in Massachusetts Community Colleges Linear Trends, April 2014.

b STCC – STCC graduates taking Exam, as reported by department chair.

c STCC - National PTA Licensure Examination as reported by department chair.

d STCC – National Certification Exam as reported by department chair.

e American Registry of Radiologic Technologist (ARRT)

f STCC – Respiratory Certification Exam as reported by department chair

g STCC – Medical Assisting Certification Exam as reported by department chair

h STCC - CAAHEP (Sonography) – AB as reported by department chair

i STCC - CAAHEP (Sonography) – OB as reported by department chair

j STCC – NBSTSA (Surgical Tech) CST as reported by department chair

k STCC - Dental Assisting (ICE, RHS, GC, CDA combined) as reported by department chair


Form S4. COMPLETION AND PLACEMENT RATES FOR SHORT-TERM VOCATIONAL TRAINING PROGRAMS FOR WHICH STUDENTS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR FEDERAL FINANCIAL AID

3 Years Prior

(2009)

2 Years Prior

(2010)

1 Year Prior

(2011)

Most Recent Year (2012)

Goal for 2013

Completion Rates * a

Program # % # % # % # % # %

1

ACMM.COC - Multimedia Technology 1 0% 1 0% 1 0%

2

ARCH.COC - Architectural Technology 2 50%

3

AUTO.COC - Automotive Technology 16 56% 11 73% 9 56% 8 75%

4 CADM.COC CAD/CAM 4 25% 1 0% 2 0%

5

CCAD.COC - Computer-Aided Drafting 1 0% 3 33%

6

CCAM.COC - Computer-Aided Manufacturing 1 0%

7

CIVL.COC - Civil Engineering Technology 4 0% 2 0% 1 0%

8

CLER.CRT - Clerical Office Assistant 2 0% 1 0% 3 33% 4 0%


9

CLLS.COC - Clinical Laboratory Assistant 2 50% 1 100%

10 CNCO.COC - CNC Operations 6 50% 2 0% 4 25% 7 71%

11

CNST.COC - Construction Management 1 0% 3 33% 4 25% 1 0%

12 COSM.CRT - Cosmetology 12 83% 16 88% 9 67% 13 77%

13

CSAC.COC - Computer Software Applications 2 50%

14

CSET.COC - Computer Systems Engineering Technology 1 100% 1 100%

15

CWTC.COC - Clean Water Technology 5 40%

16 DAST.CRT - Dental Assistant 2 0% 1 100%

17

DPHO.COC - Digital Photography 1 0% 1 0% 1 100%

18 DPUB.COC - Digital Publishing 3 100%

19

ENGY.COC - Heating/Ventilation/Air Conditioning 14 43% 10 30% 8 25% 6 66%


20

EROB.COC - Electrical/Robotics Technology 1 0%

21

ESET.COC - Electronic Systems Technology 2 50%

22

FIRE.COC - Fire Science Technology 1 0% 1 0%

23

GRPH.COC - Graphic Arts Technology 2 0% 3 0% 4 0%

24 HTHC.COC - Health Aide 1 0%

25

INHC.COC - Massage Therapy 1 0% 1 100%

26

LAND.COC - Landscape Design and Management 1 0% 1 0% 2 0%

27 LECJ.COC - Criminal Justice 3 67% 2 0% 3 33% 1 0%

28

MCRC.COC - Microcomputer Specialist 1 100% 1 0% 1 0%

29

MEDA.COC - Medical Assistant 1 100%

30

MEDC.COC - Medical Coding and Billing Specialist 5 60% 6 33% 6 50% 2 0%


*completion rates are for completion within 150% time for IPEDs FTFT Fall cohorts.

Job Placement Rates **b

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Certificates

1 CNC Operations

(48-0510) 55%

2

Heating/Ventilation/Air

Conditioning (47-0201) 56% 81% 46% 71%

3

Medical Assistant (51-

0801) 83% 82% 77% 67% 80%

4

Medical Coding and Billing

Specialist (51-0713) 69% 75% 64% 82%

5 Cosmetology

(12-0401) 73% 90% 79% 88% 53%

6 Dental Assistant

(51-0601) 100% 60% 90% 88%

Associates

7

Automotive Technology (15-

0803) 50%

8

Business Administration - Accounting (52-

0301) 70% 81% 57% 82%

9 Business Administration -

70%


Management (52-0201)

Business/Comm

erce (52-0101) 80% 42% 59% 73%

10

Civil Engineering Technology (15-

0201) 86% 67%

11

Clinical Laboratory

Science (51-1004) 91% 89% 100% 88%

12 Commercial Art

(50-0402) 75% 60%

13

Computer Information Security (11-

1003) 75% 85% 50% 80%

14

Computer Systems

Engineering Technology (15-

1201) 60% 83% 90%

15 Dental Hygiene

(51-0602) 86% 67% 88% 100% 87%

16

Diagnostic Medical Imaging-Radiography (51-

0911) 88% 83% 75% 83% 82%

17

Diagnostic Medical Imaging-Sonography (51-

0910) 75% 83% 86% 60%

18 Early Childhood Education (13-

88%


1210)

19

Electrical Engineering

Technology (15-0403) 67% 75% 62%

20

Energy Systems Technology (15-

0501) 43% 55% 60% 47%

21

Fire Protection and Safety Tech

(43-0201) 83% 100% 89%

22 Health Careers Core (51-9999) 67%

23

Law Enforcement

(43-0107) 76% 72% 82% 75% 72%

24

Liberal Arts Transfer (24-

0101) 60% 80%

25

Liberal Arts/General

Studies (24-0102) 69% 65% 62% 75% 64%

27

Mechanical Engineering

Technology (15-0805) 64% 86% 83% 75%

28

Medical Assistant (51-

0801) 86%

29

Medical Coding & Billing (51-

0713) 67% 73% 82% 84%


30 Nursing (51-

3801) 85% 86% 77% 77% 80%

31

Occupational Therapy

Assistant (51-0803) 88% 82%

32

Physical Therapist

Assistant (51-0806) 62% 64% 82% 43%

33 Respiratory Care

(51-0908) 83% 78% 75% 100% 100%

34

Surgical Technology (51-

0909) 91% 100% 82% 91%

35

Telecommunications Technology

(15-0305) 94% 100% 100% 100% 80%

* List each short-term vocational training program separately. In the following columns indicate the annual weighted average completion rate for the most recent and two prior years. In the final two columns, list institutional goals for the next two years.

** List each short-term vocational training program separately. In the following columns indicate the annual weighted job placement rate for the most recent and two prior years. In the final two columns, list the institutional goals for the next two years.

** For each major for which the institution tracks job placement rates, list the degree and major, and the time period following graduation for which the institution is reporting placement success (e.g., Mechanical Engineer, B.S., six months). In the following columns, report the percent of graduates who have jobs in their fields within the specified time.

b Employment After College data provided by MA DHE November 2015 – verified employment in Massachusetts. Does not include self-employment or employment across state lines. Note that STCC is on border with CT. Data for programs with >5 graduates included. Employed if graduate had employment at least 3 of 5 quarters after graduation.


Appendix G: Springfield Technical Community College All-Unit Congress (AUC) By-Laws

Preamble: The All-Unit Congress (AUC) was formed to effectively represent the vast majority of those who work at Springfield Technical Community College: It will include all full-time or part-time employees below the level of director, regardless of union status. Function of the All-Unit Congress: The All-Unit Congress shall consider matters relating to the welfare of STCC placed before it by the membership of the Congress. This Congress shall have no existence separate and apart from STCC. This body will hold a General Assembly twice every semester to hear from the membership, report on the work of the standing committees, and vote on matters of concern. The represented membership will have a formal relationship with the Board of Trustees, representing a change in the form of governance on this campus. The nature of this relationship just be fashioned and agreed upon by the Administration, the Congress, and the STCC Board of Trustees. Eligibility: The All-Unit Congress shall be composed of all non-administrative STCC employees. Representative of STCC’s Student Government may be granted special observer status and bring student concerns to the attention of the All-Unit Congress; however, Student Government representatives will not be eligible to vote. All-Unit Congress Structure and Elections: The All-Unit Congress will be co-chaired by one faculty member and one member of the professional staff elected by the General Assembly. Nominations and elections for this and other offices will take place during the September General Assembly. All such proceedings will be governed by Robert Rules of Order. All pertinent matters will be ratified after being properly moved, seconded and discussed by a simple majority established through a show of hands. There will be four standing committees. The two co-chairs of the Congress and the chairperson of each of the four standing committees will be nominated and elected by the general membership of the All-Unit Congress. All members of the All-Unit Congress are eligible to vote or serve as committee chairs, as described in the bylaws. Every member of the Congress has an equal vote in all matters concerning the All-Unit Congress. The constitution of the All-Unit Congress can be amended by a simple majority during the General Assembly or a special meeting of the general membership convened for that purpose. Procedure: Any member will have an opportunity to bring issues to the attention of the All-Unit Congress, either at the General Assembly or meetings of the Standing Committees. Standing Committees will meet once a month (or as necessary) and post meeting dates, times and locations in advance to insure access and participation by any interested member of the All-Unit Congress. Where an item involves the interests of multiple committees, an ad hoc committee will be created by the coordinating committee to address the particular issue. After completing its assigned task and reporting to the co-chairs, said ad hoc committee will be dissolved. After review and ratification by committee members, each committee chairperson will present a report of their committee’s findings to the General Assembly. Those authorized by the Congress will present these findings to the college’s President and the STCC Board of Trustees, making them aware of the problems and concerns of the All-Unit Congress and to implement solutions.


Bylaws:

I. Committees a. Coordinating Committee

i. Charge - The Coordinating Committee will oversee the operations of the All-Unit Congress, in the charge of the Standing Committees, in communicating with the other constituencies on campus, and in communicating with the larger campus community.

ii. Personnel 1. Faculty co-chair 2. Staff co-chair 3. Academic Affairs Committee chair 4. Facilities and Safety Committee chair 5. Staff Committee chair 6. Recording Secretary

a. this is a paid position b. responsible for recording the minutes of Coordinating

Committee meetings and those of the General Assemblies c. responsible for reserving rooms for all Coordinating and

Standing committee meetings as well as ordering lunch d. responsible for keeping track of the budget

iii. Procedure 1. Meetings will be called at least twice per semester based on the

employee planner 2. Minutes of the meeting will be recorded and prepared by the

recording secretary and shared with the Congress membership 3. The committee will review issues presented by members of the

Congress to decide which Standing Committee will address each 4. For an issue that crosses lines of Standing Committee purview, an ad

hoc committee will be formed for the specific purpose of investigating and resolving that one issue

iv. Powers 1. convene General Assembly 2. form ad hoc committees 3. review and assess AUC effectiveness 4. draft proposed amendments to AUC constitution

v. budget - The College will allocate sufficient funding for the operations of the All-Unit Congress and its committees.

b. Academic Affairs Standing Committee i. Charge - This committee has responsibility with respect to academic

policies, educational standards, curricula, and academic regulations. ii. Personnel

1. One full-time faculty from each of the six schools a. Arts, Humanities & Social Sciences b. Business & Information Technologies c. Engineering Technologies d. Health & Patient Simulation e. Math, Sciences and Engineering


f. Nursing 2. At least one non-full time adjunct faculty member from any school 3. The committee should also contain up to 5 staff members whose duties involve

academic matters. 4. The term is one year with a limit of three consecutive terms. 5. The committee will have the responsibility of designating a recording

secretary a. The method of fulfilling this requirement is at the discretion of the

committee b. The recording secretary will be responsible for preparation of the minutes of

the meeting and distribution of those minutes to the AUC membership

iii. Procedure 1. Meetings will be called at least once per month based on the employee

planner 2. Additional meetings may be called if an issue requires, and business cannot be

settled through electronic communications 3. Minutes of the meeting will be recorded and prepared by a recording secretary

and shared with the Congress membership iv. Powers

1. form ad hoc subcommittees 2. communicate with administration on matters concerning curriculum,

commencement, etc. 3. review and assess academic effectiveness 4. draft proposed amendments to AUC constitution

c. Facilities and Safety Standing Committee i. Charge - The committee hears from and consults with maintainers, campus police,

and others to ensure the safety and efficiency of the institution. ii. Personnel

1. One full-time employee (faculty or staff) from each of the primary buildings a. Building 27 b. Building 17 c. Building 13 d. Building 2 e. Building 20 f. Building 16/15

g. Building 28 2. One employee from the campus police 3. One employee from facilities

a. this may be a maintainer from one of the above buildings and could satisfy both personnel slots

4. At least one non-full time employee from any school 5. The term is one year with a limit of three consecutive terms. The committee will

have the responsibility of designating a recording secretary a. The method of fulfilling this requirement is at the discretion of the

committee b. The recording secretary will be responsible for preparation of the minutes

of the meeting and distribution of those minutes to the AUC membership



planner 2. Additional meetings may be called if an issue requires, and business cannot be

settled through electronic communications 3. Minutes of the meeting will be recorded and prepared by a recording secretary

and shared with the Congress membership iv. Powers

1. Form subcommittees 2. Assess campus safety procedures 3. Review and assess facilities effectiveness 4. Draft proposed amendments to AUC constitution d. (Professional

and Classified) Staff Standing Committee i. Charge - Convene and chair meetings to review issues that apply to professional and

staff employees ii. Personnel

1. Representative from each department as determined by the committee. Those representatives may be full or part-time

2. The committee will have the responsibility of designating a recording secretary

a. The method of fulfilling this requirement is at the discretion of the committee

b. The recording secretary will be responsible for preparation of the minutes of the meeting and distribution of those minutes to the AUC membership


planner. 2. Additional meetings may be called if an issue requires, and business cannot be

settled through electronic communications. 3. Minutes of the meeting will be recorded and prepared by a recording secretary and

shared with the Congress membership. 4. Attends all meetings as possible. 5. Accepts and supports the congress’s purpose and charge. 6. Maintains records and relevant information on congress work. 7. The chair must be sufficiently informed to interact knowledgeably with other

congress members, instructors, and the administration. 8. Moves members toward consensus and decision-making. 9. Evaluates congress efforts and communicates accomplishments to the sub-

committee and college administration. iv. Powers

1. Form subcommittees a. These subcommittees should include faculty and staff, part time

and full time. i. Representation from each of the departments

b. There should be subcommittees as followed: i. Student Support Services-

1. Include a student ii. Staff Support and Resources Services


iii. College Activities iv. Communication and Marketing

2. Assess campus safety procedures as they impact the working environment of staff employees

a. This should include a representative from the Campus Police and the Facilities Department coordinate with the Safety and Facilities Committee

3. Review and assess “metacurricular” effectiveness a. This would include, but is not limited to, advising, counseling, student services, the library, and disability services

4. Draft proposed amendments to AUC constitution II. Participation

a. Nominations i. At the last General Assembly of the school year, nominations will be taken for

the elected positions which will need to be filled in the coming year ii. one of the co-chairs as well as all three Standing Committee chairs iii. Standing Committee chairs who wish to continue in their position may indicate

at that time iv. Nominations taken from the floor must be seconded and the nominated individual

must agree to the nomination (and therefore must be present) v. Any uncontested positions will be elected by a single ballot cast by the recording

secretary b. Term limits

i. Co-chairs are elected to two-year terms to be staggered 1. the incoming staff co-chair works with the established faculty co-chair 2. the co-chairs are limited to serving one two-year term at a time 3. they can run again after two terms have passed

ii. Standing Committee chairs are elected to one-year terms 1. Standing Committee chairs are limited to serving two consecutive terms 2. they can run again after two terms have passed

c. Administrative Resources i. Under certain circumstances, Standing Committees or the Coordinating

Committee may require the consultation of administrative personnel who are not members of the All-Unit Congress.

ii. Members of the administration can be asked to participate in meetings as resources, at the discretion of the committee and its chairperson

iii. These participants would be guests of the committee without voting privileges

III. General Assembly a. Procedure

i. Meetings will be called at least twice per semester based on the employee planner

ii. An agenda will be prepared by the co-chairs and presented to the membership at the beginning of the Assembly, if not earlier

iii. Minutes of the meeting will be recorded and prepared by the recording secretary and shared with the Congress membership

b. Voting


i. Motions proposed and seconded will be voted upon, following required discussion, by the body of the General Assembly

ii. All employees represented by the MCCC or AFSCME unions, or non-unit employees below the level of director are eligible to vote iii. Voting will be by voice unless more precise counting is evidently

necessarily 2. Vote by a show of hands will be used which must be counted by both co-chairs (or their designees) and recorded by the secretary

2. If a secret ballot is called for by a voting member of the Assembly, every effort will be made to accommodate that within the time of the meeting. However, if constraints necessitate, voting may be conducted through a secure polling web service.

iv. Voting will require a simple majority except for amendments to the constitution which will require a two-thirds majority. 1. Changes to the bylaws will require a simple majority and can be voted upon

when the motion is presented, following any necessary discussion. 2. Motions for resolutions will require a simple majority vote to pass.

c. Amendments i. Motions proposing amendments to this document may be made at the General

Assembly ii. Any member intending to make a motion at an Assembly is encouraged to share it by

electronic mail prior to the meeting to foster broader discussion iii. Amendments must be proposed by motion at one Assembly and voted upon at the

following Assembly unless iv. The body of the Assembly may vote to move to a vote on an amendment within the same

meeting as the motion is made only by unanimity v. Passage of amendments requires sixty percent of the vote

Springfield Technical Community College BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Updated: February 24, 2016

Page 1 of 4

Appointment Term Expiration

CHAIR

Christopher C. Johnson 12/22/06 03/01/19 Johnson & Sclafani 776 Westfield Street West Springfield, MA 01089 (413) 732-8356 (Business) (413) 439-0480 (Fax) Email: [email protected]

VICE CHAIR

Debra A. Kaylor 07/26/10 03/01/16 Senior Manager Meyers Brothers Kalicka, P.C. 330 Whitney Ave., Suite 800 Holyoke, MA 01040 (413) 536-8510 (Business) (413) 533-8399 (Fax) Email: [email protected] SECRETARY

Daniel P. Moen 06/17/13 06/17/16 Executive Vice President / Chief Operating Officer Trinity Health – New England 1000 Asylum Avenue, 5th Floor Hartford, CT 06701 (860) 714-9165 (Business Phone at Trinity Health New England) (413) 748-9316 (Business Phone at Sisters of Providence Health Systems) (413) 781-7217 (Fax at Sisters of Providence Health Systems) Email: [email protected] STUDENT TRUSTEE 12/11/14 06/30/16

Benigno (Ben) Padilla III 396 Fernbank Road Springfield, MA 01129 (413) 302-2798 (Mobile) Email: [email protected]

William H. Abrashkin 04/23/12 03/01/16 Executive Director Springfield Housing Authority 60 Congress Street – PO Box 1609 Springfield, MA 01101 (413) 785-4515 (Business) Email: [email protected]


mailto:[email protected]





blchalfonte

Typewritten Text

Appendix H. STCC Board of Trustees & Committees



Page 2 of 4

Appointment Term Expiration

Maria P. Gonçalves 04/27/06 03/01/15 Sr. V.P. Commercial Loans TD Banknorth, N.A. 1441 Main Street Springfield, MA 01103 (413) 748-8162 (Business) (413) 781-3087 (Fax) Email: [email protected] Steven E. Grande 11/13/15 03/01/19 President Meridian Industrial Group, LLC. 529 South East Street Holyoke, MA 01040 (413) 538-9880 (Business) (413) 533-9602 (FAX) Email: [email protected] Eric D. Hagopian 07/18/12 03/01/16 President Massachusetts Center for Advanced Design and Manufacturing (MCADM) 68 Timber Drive East Longmeadow, MA 01028 (413) 237-1383 (Mobile) Email: [email protected] Rosa I. Maldonado-Brown 01/05/15 03/01/17 Probation Officer II Hampden County Superior Court PO Box 4261 Springfield, MA 01101 (413) 205-7531 (Business) Email: [email protected] Franklin D. Quigley, Jr. 01/08/16 04/01/20 FD Quigley & Associates 10 Old Farm Road Wilbraham, MA 01095-1445 (413) 388-0076 (Mobile) Email: [email protected]




../../../users/wcastellano/My%20Documents/[email protected]





Page 3 of 4

Appointment Term Expiration MacArthur Starks, Jr. 12/29/15 03/01/17 Assistant Vice President, Change Agent MM Way Center of Excellence at MassMutual 59 Wrenwood Street Springfield, MA 01118 (413) 374-2933 (Mobile) (413) 351-5123 (Mobile) Email: [email protected] (Business)





Page 4 of 4

COMMITTEES EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

Chris Johnson (Chair of the STCC Board of Trustees) Debra Kaylor (Vice Chair) Daniel Moen (Secretary) COMMITTEE ON INTERNAL and EXTERNAL RELATIONS

Chris Johnson (Chair of the STCC Board of Trustees) – ex-officio member William Abrashkin (Committee Chair) Steven Grande Rosa Maldonado-Brown Benigno Padilla III Franklin Quigley COMMITTEE ON WAYS and MEANS

Chris Johnson (Chair of the STCC Board of Trustees) – ex-officio member Debra Kaylor (Committee Chair) Maria Gonçalves Eric Hagopian Dan Moen MacArthur Starks, Jr. AUDIT SUB-COMMITTEE

Maria Gonçalves Deborah Kaylor (Committee Chair) MacArthur Starks

All other members or participants of the Audit Committee are not members of the

STCC Board of Trustees

Ira Rubenzahl Michael Suzor Joseph DaSilva Cathy Olson Jonathan Tudryn Bob LePage Downey, Sweeney, Fitzgerald & Co., P.C. (STCC Foundation Auditors)

INVESTMENT SUB-COMMITTEE

Chris Johnson (Chair of the STCC Board of Trustees) MacArthur Starks, Jr. (Committee Chair)

All other members or participants of the Investment Sub-Committee are not members of the

STCC Board of Trustees

Peter Lyons Joe Mitchell Michael Chase Michael Suzor Joseph DaSilva Jonathan Tudryn



Appendix I: STCC Organizational Chart (abbreviated)

Date post:	11-Jun-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times