INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM REVIEW
Annual Program Review Update
Life Sciences Department
Riverside City Campus
Greg Burchett
Department Chair
May 28, 2008
Riverside Community College District
Office of Institutional Effectiveness
1
Life Sciences 2007-2008 Annual Program Review
Trends and Relevant Data (part 1)
1. Has there been any change in the status of your unit? (if not, skip to #2)
 There have been no changes to the department status.
a. Has your unit shifted departments?
 No.
b. Have new programs been created by your unit?
 No.
c. Have activities in other units impacted your unit?
 On 20 May 2008, the Life Science department had a department meeting
with academic and nursing administration. During this meeting, details of
a US Department of Education award were discussed, in which Federal
money was awarded RCCD to help high school students take pre-requisite
courses for nursing (or other pre-professional) programs while in high
school.
 The District has committed itself to teaching courses at Rubidoux High
School. Norco College had originally offered life science courses such as
BIO 36 (Environmental Science), and our department has continued to
offer these courses. The District has also invited the department to offer a
wider variety of courses at Rubidoux.
 The District has scheduled Anatomy/Physiology courses (AMY 10, AMY
2A and AMY 2B) at Rubidoux in the 2008-2009 academic year.
o In order to offer more courses at Rubidoux High School, additional
faculty and support staff will have to be hired.
 It is not the intent of the department to allow a grant to drive academic
interests. The decision by the District to offer courses at Rubidoux is
independent of any earmarked funds.
o The Department is working on revised projected costs, and how the
award can best serve the target student population.
 The primary impact on the LS department is qualified faculty teaching
load, and the acquisition of required classroom materials to adequately
offer anatomy courses.
o The proposal committed one of our faculty to a 0.4 reassign.
o The proposal ($335,000+) contains 2% for the required supplies to
offer courses, with 2% allocated for textbooks and travel.
o The remaining 96% of the proposed budget is currently allocated
towards salaries, with annual COLA adjustments of (3%, 3%, 3%
and 10%).
2


The life sciences department does not support the current award projected
budget, and its allocation of over 90% towards salary, and has suggested
the monies be spent on equipment and technology that will benefit the most
students.
The Life Sciences department does not support hiring of RXHS personnel
on soft money (i.e. grants and awards), especially if the District intends to
keep RXHS as a long-term commitment. Life Sciences is currently rewriting the proposed budget and award proposal. The current award
proposal (and budget) is not justifiable or feasible.
2. Have there been any significant changes in enrollment, retention, success rates, or
environmental demographics that impact your discipline (See Appendix for Data)? If
there are no significant changes in your unit’s opinion say “None” and skip to question
#3.
 None. Data from Fall 2004 through Fall 2007 (see Table 1) shows no
significant changes in enrollment, retention, or success.
3. What changes does the unit plan to make to advance enrollment management goals?
 The Life Sciences department is expecting to move into a new science
building/complex in 2010 or 2011, if it is built on schedule. As the move
becomes closer to reality, additional resources will be needed, and
management of course offerings and equipment needs will have to be taken
into account. The department goal is to be fully functional in the new
facility, the semester that the move is completed.
 Currently, without more lab space (in particular), we cannot offer more
course sections. The department has begun offering more courses, in
classrooms located throughout the campus (i.e. HES courses) in order to
meet current demand. Through time, course offerings become more
efficient by incorporating past success in the classes. Eventually, as the
department moves into its new facilities, these increased sections may be
able to be housed strictly within the complex, alleviating the need for
additional classroom space throughout the campus.
 One potential benefit of the earmarked award mentioned above is the
acquisition of materials (microscopes, models, computers) for use at
RBHS, with the intention of using these materials to equip the new lab
facilities, after the conclusion of the grant (four years). This would allow
this department to begin preparing for the inevitable move into new
anatomy facilities by purchasing microscopes, computers, models, and
histology slides.
 Another potential benefit for offering anatomy courses at Rubidoux is
meeting current demand for these courses, getting equipment needed to
offer these courses, and being able to move into the new facilities at full
capacity for high-demand courses.
3
When looking at enrollment trends, the following data gives an illustration for the LS
Department over the last 13 sessions (retention rates, success I, and success II).
Table 1. Enrollment Trends
(based on data provided by the District)
Class
Amy 2A
Amy 2B
Amy 10
Bio 1
Bio 2A
Bio 2B
Bio 3
Bio 5
Bio 6
Bio 7
Bio 8
Bio 9
Bio 11
Bio 12
Bio 34
Bio 36
HES 1
MIC 1
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
Ret
SI
S II
F
04
91
82
90
64
58
90
83
51
62
81
55
67
72
56
78
W
05
81
9
86
87
73
85
Sp
05
75
61
82
91
83
91
69
42
61
77
46
60
Su
05
91
82
90
94
70
74
F
05
89
78
88
59
58
98
82
40
49
73
43
59
91
78
86
W
06
100
100
100
83
64
77
92
88
96
83
53
63
Su
06
100
87
88
83
53
64
63
43
68
92
92
100
94
59
63
74
59
79
79
62
78
92
77
83
96
79
83
91
91
100
Su
07
95
87
92
68
50
73
93
73
79
89
44
50
86
62
70
100
82
82
66
57
87
100
94
94
93
79
85
61
39
64
91
84
93
92
62
67
79
60
75
75
53
70
89
58
65
60
47
77
94
80
86
4
F
07
89
79
90
83
74
89
75
46
61
75
46
61
100
100
100
94
63
67
92
61
66
86
62
72
72
39
54
85
61
72
Sp
07
60
49
81
83
72
86
58
40
69
66
48
64
86
61
71
88
84
96
96
74
77
96
79
83
W
07
87
82
94
96
93
96
91
73
80
75
33
44
77
55
71
79
61
77
95
67
70
F
06
87
70
80
94
85
90
73
48
66
76
50
66
90
85
94
87
82
95
71
62
87
85
63
74
91
61
67
78
60
77
Sp
06
61
54
89
87
81
93
80
58
72
66
42
64
96
73
77
95
75
78
93
82
88
73
49
68
71
54
77
95
85
90
65
53
81
70
52
75
87
60
69
92
58
63
78
58
75
81
71
88
89
55
62
66
55
83
95
77
82
89
66
73
85
67
80
92
75
82
74
48
65
85
51
60
87
51
58
81
62
76
TOTAL
85
74
88
82
74
91
75
47
62
76
49
65
83
71
86
92
88
96
80
60
75
84
52
62
86
62
70
93
92
99
95
75
80
94
75
80
72
54
76
83
68
83
87
64
73
84
59
70
91
62
68
77
60
78
Table 2. Department Efficiency Calculations
(based on data provided by the District)
Discipline
Anatomy/Physiology
Biology
Health Science
Microbiology
TOTALS
FT
3.93
10.77
2
2.0
18.7
PT
3.36
2.58
3.3
1.2
10.44
FTEF
7.29
13.35
5.3
3.2
29.14
%FT
53
80.6
67.9
62.5
64.2%
FTES
100.44
199.69
196.37
30.67
WSCH
3234.89
6431.66
6324.83
987.71
16,979.09
Efficiency
443.74
481.77
1193.36
308.65
582.67
FT = Full-time faculty (the same faculty are counted twice – this number is not accurate).
PT = Adjunct faculty and full-time overload teaching assignments.
FTEF = Full-Time Equivalent Faculty.
%FT = Percent of courses taught by full-time faculty.
FTES = Full-Time Equivalent Students.
WSCH = Weekly Student Contact Hour.
Efficiency = WSCH/FTEF
Table 3. Department Efficiency Calculations
(re-assessment of data by the Department)
Discipline
Anatomy/Physiology
Biology
Health Science
Microbiology
TOTALS
FT*
2
4.8
1.4
.8
9
PT*
5.29
8.55
3.9
2.4
20.14
FTEF
7.29
13.35
5.3
3.2
29.14
%FT
53
80.6
67.9
62.5
30.8%
FTES
100.44
199.69
196.37
30.67
WSCH
3234.89
6431.66
6324.83
987.71
16,979.09
Efficiency
443.74
481.77
1193.36
308.65
582.67
Using the District FTEF, FTES, and WSCH data, the Life Sciences Department reanalyzed teaching load (*) for each faculty member.
 Contract load was differentiated from overload assignments.
o If a faculty member has a teaching load of 1.4, the first 1.0 was applied
towards FT and the additional 0.4 was applied towards PT.
 There are nine FT faculty members within the Life Sciences department.
o This number accurately reflects faculty which are employed by Life
Sciences, when compared to 18.7 FT faculty members as shown in Table 1.
 30.8% of courses offered by Life Sciences are taught by our FT faculty as part of
their contractual load.
o This compares to 64.2% as presented in Table 1.
o This correct interpretation (Title 5 Section 53310) of the data severely
impacts this departments 75/25 target teaching FT/PT ratio.
o Our analysis of this data calls into serious question the past interpretation
practices that have been used.
 Overall Department efficiency calculations were unaffected by this re-calculation.
5
Department Efficiency
Based on data generated from the District, the Life Science department is efficient in its
course offerings and enrollment. However, when looking at the data:

75/25 ratio (FT/PT)
o The District has historically analyzed and interpreted its FT and PT data to
show ratios within the classroom.
 The Department re-analyzed this data and interpreted its results.
 30.8% of this department course offerings are taught by full-time
faculty members, as part of their contractual load.
 The remaining 69.2% of course offerings are taught either by
adjunct faculty, or full-time faculty as part of their overload
assignments.
o If the goal of the District (and Department) is to reach a 75/25 (FT/PT)
teaching ratio, with a target efficiency of 525, then:
 The target FTEF for Life Sciences currently would be 32.34
(WSCH/525), rather than the existing 29.14.
o If the goal of this department is 75% of course offerings taught by FT
faculty, then:
 24.25 FT faculty would be needed (32.34*0.75), based on current
WSCH.
o Obviously, arguing for 24 FT faculty members based on current (F05/F06)
WSCH is unrealistic. However, this analysis does accurately reflect fulltime faculty within the department, the reliance on overload assignments,
the impact that the gradual reduction in FT faculty membership, and the
increased reliance on PT faculty have had on the department.

The data shown above only is for Fall 2006 and Fall 2007.
o This data does not reflect course offerings for Winter 07, Spring 07, and
Summer 2007. These additional FTEF and WSCH would impact the
overall efficiency of Life Sciences (i.e. AMY 2B has more sections in
Spring versus Fall).
o This additional data was not available to the Department during this
program review, and we will request this data in order to generate a more
complete review on our next document.
As the Department began looking at efficiency data, questions were raised on how this
data was collected, and in the original analysis. The department did find inaccuracies in
the data, and our discussions allowed additional questions to be asked.
 On Thursday May 22, the Department met with District personnel to discuss data
integrity, and the appropriate use of analysis.
 It was decided, for the sake of timely reporting in this document, that no further
data analysis/interpretation would take place at this time, and that more scrutiny in
the data analysis during the 2008-2009 program review would take place.
6
Learning Outcomes Assessment Update
4. In order to help us complete the annual ACCJC report on our progress in assessing student
learning, please provide the following information by completing the form. Please add lines
as needed:
Name of Program or Course (please
list programs first)
Anatomy/Physiology 10
Anatomy/Physiology 2A
Anatomy/Physiology 2B
Biology 1
Biology 2A
Biology 2B
Biology 3
Biology 5
Biology 6
Biology 7
Biology 8
Biology 9
Biology 11
Biology 12
Biology 34
Biology 36
Health Science 1
Student
learning
outcomes have
been identified
(Yes = 1
No = 0)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Outcomes
assessment
information or
data has been
generated
(Yes = 1
No = 0)
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Assessment
information or
data has been
used to improve
student learning
(Yes = 1
No = 0)
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5. How has your unit been engaged this past year in assessing student learning?
 Not during the 2007-2008 academic year. Our District-wide Discipline has planned
on five biology courses to be assessed this next academic year.
 The Riverside Life Science biology department is also re-assessing our coursework.
a. Summarize your results (whenever possible, provide documentation of student
learning in your discipline and evidence that assessment data has been generated).

Student Learning Outcomes assessment was completed for one of our largest course
offerings, Biology 1, during the 2006-2007 academic year. This last year, the initial
results from this District-wide discipline assessment was used to re-assess and reevaluate the Biology 1 course. We are using this experience to determine our courseof-action for our next round of assessment.
7
b. What did your unit learn from these results that enabled you to improve teaching and
learning in the discipline?



More of an effort to convey the scientific method to our students. The adoption of
more hands-on manipulative laboratory assignments, with a larger written
requirement during lab.
Complete “re-vamp” of lecture and laboratories. A brand-new laboratory manual
was created, and a new biology textbook was selected, both of which will be
adopted in Fall 2008 for the first time.
The assessment strategy needed to be re-evaluated. The lessons learned from the
SLO assessment will help the department be more effective in how it assesses
future courses.
c. How have part-time faculty been made aware of the need to assess student learning
outcomes and been included in assessment activities?

To this point, this has been a full-time faculty endeavor. As we re-assess our
assessment strategies, we will become more familiar with assessment, and more
efficient in our methodologies. At this point, our adjunct faculty will have the
opportunity to participate.
6. If your SLO assessment results make clear that particular resources are needed to more
effectively serve students please be sure to describe the need here and include it on the request
forms.

The laboratory portion of Biology 1 has been changed dramatically, and will need
the corresponding changes in materials purchased to offer the new (or
substantially changed) laboratory assignments.
8
Human Resource Needs
7. Complete the Faculty and Staff Employment Grid below. Please list full and part time
faculty numbers in separate rows. Please list classified staff who are full and part time
separately:
Faculty and Staff Employed in the Unit
Assignment
Full-time faculty or
staff (give number)
Part-time faculty or
staff (give number)
2
5.29
1 PT
Biology
4.8
8.55
3 PT
Health Science
1.4
3.9
Microbiology
0.8
2.4
1
0.5
Anatomy/Phys
Staff
Gains over Prior
Year
Losses over Prior
Year (given
reason, retirement,
reassignment,
health, etc.)
1 FT (retired)
Additional Human Resource Concerns
For human resource needs, it is informative to look at historical perspective:





This department has gone from a high of 13 full-time faculty in 1988, to its present
level of 8, plus 1 one-year temporary FT faculty member.
Within the last three years, we have lost three faculty members:
o One due to a transfer to an administrator position.
o One due to retirement.
o One due to a resignation, due to personal reasons.
We were able to re-hire the faculty member who resigned due to personal reasons.
She will rejoin our Department in Summer of 2008. This brings our FT faculty
members back to 9.
We were also awarded two additional FT faculty member positions.
o One of these was the continuation of the one-year temporary position,
which was a replacement for the administrative transfer.
o If hired, this would bring our FT faculty members back to 10.
o The last position was a replacement for the retirement, and if hired, would
bring the FT faculty membership to 11.
Our course (and section) offerings haven’t been affected by having fewer FT
faculty in the Department. This was made possible by FT faculty increasing their
workload (due to overload), and the reliance of more PT faculty members.
9
When looking at our Department, from a historical perspective, the Department was very
fortunate to have the opportunity to have full-time faculty positions awarded to us. The
Life Sciences Department is very grateful for this investment by the District.
Coincidently, the full-time faculty member who resigned for personal reasons was
recently re-instated by the Board of Trustees, and will be joining this Department Summer
2008.
The other two faculty positions are currently in the hiring process. If the Department is
fortunate enough to hire two qualified faculty, their assignments would start in Fall 2008.
If either one (or both) of the positions fails to be filled, then the Department plans on reoffering the positions early in Fall 2008, for employment beginning Fall 2009. The delay
in the hiring process for these positions may very well adversely impact the quality of the
hiring pool, and our Department recognizes this.

If we are fortunate enough to hire two faculty, an additional faculty office will also
have to be built within the department. Currently we have ten offices.
Our Department is also fully aware of the move into a new sciences complex in the near
(2010 or 2011) future, and the human resource needs which will be required when the
move is complete. The recent hiring activity will allow this department to approach the
FT levels it once had, without addressing future growth needs as we prepare to increase
course/section offerings once the new science complex construction is completed.
The Department is fully aware of the importance in planning, and the intent of the
Department is to be fully functional, fully staffed, and fully equipped in order to maximize
the new facility in its course and section offerings.
10
Riverside Life Sciences Annual Program Review Update
Needs Worksheet
NEW OR REPLACEMENT FACULTY
List Faculty Positions Needed for Academic Year 2008-2009
Please be as specific and as brief as possible when offering a reason for the position (e.g. retirement
replacement, increased demand for subject, growth in overall student population). Be certain to mark the
position as new or replacement. Place titles on list in order (rank) or importance.
1. ASSUMING THAT THE LIFE SCIENCES DEPARTMENT FILLS THE TWO VACANT
FACULTY POSITIONS CURRENTLY IN THE INTERVIEW PROCESS, THERE WILL BE NO
ADDITIONAL NEED FOR FACULTY NEXT ACADEMIC YEAR. IF EITHER THE POSITIONS
ARE NOT FILLED, THEN THEY WOULD NEED TO BE OFFERED AGAIN IN THE 2008-2009
ACADEMIC YEAR FOR EMPLOYMENT BEGINNING FALL 2009.
2.
Reason:
3.
Reason:
4.
Reason:
5.
Reason:
6.
Reason:
11
Annual TCP*
TCP for employee
Riverside Life Sciences Annual Program Review Update
Needs Worksheet
NEW OR REPLACEMENT CLASSIFIED STAFF
List Staff Positions Needed for Academic Year 2008-2009
Please be as specific and as brief as possible when offering a reason. Place titles on list in order (rank) or
importance.
Annual TCP*
TCP for employee
1. We currently have 1.5 support staff, which is adequate for our course offerings. The District has
committed itself to offer additional courses/sections at other locations (i.e., Rubidoux, Alvord, etc.).
The Life Sciences Department now requires the 0.5 staff position be made into a 1.0 staff position, with
part of this positions job requirement the maintenance of supplies and coordination of any anatomy or
biology laboratories with the satellite locations.
2.
Reason:
3.
Reason:
4.
Reason:
5.
Reason:
6.
Reason:
* TCP = “Total Cost of Position” for one year is the cost of an average salary plus benefits for an individual. New positions (not
replacement positions) also require space and equipment. Please speak with your campus Business Officer to obtain accurate cost
estimates.
12
Riverside Life Sciences Annual Program Review Update
Needs Worksheet
Equipment Needs Not Covered by Current Budget (*cost includes tax, less shipping)
List Equipment or Equipment Repair Needed for Academic Year 2008-09
Please list/summarize the needs of your unit on your campus below. Please be
as specific and as brief as possible. Place items on list in order (rank) or
importance.
1. MICROCENTRIFUGE
Reason: To allow biology major and microbiology students an opportunity to
perform science major-level experiments. Currently, this is not an option.
2. LAP-TOP COMPUTERS FOR LABORATORIES
Reason: To allow biology major students an opportunity to perform science majorlevel experiments. Currently, this is not an option.
3. pH METER
Reason: To allow biology and microbiology students an opportunity to perform
science major-level experiments. Currently, this is not an option.
4. MULTIPARAMETER METERS
Reason: To allow biology major students an opportunity to perform science majorlevel experiments. Currently, this is not an option.
5. SWAMP COOLER
Reason: To allow non-science major, and science major students an opportunity to
propagate and experiment with living plants. Currently, this is not an option.
6. ICE MAKER
Reason: To allow non-science major biology, and biology major students an
opportunity to perform laboratory experiments which require cooler environments.
Currently, our staff and students go to the cafeteria for ice.
7. FULL ARTICULATED SKELETON
Reason: To allow anatomy/physiology students with a complete skeleton.
13
Annual TCO*
Cost per
item
Number
Requested
$1,600
1
$1,724*
$2,000
16
$34,480*
$500
1
$538.75*
$1,000
6
$6465*
$700
1
$754.25*
$6,000
1
$6,465*
$5,000
1
$5,387.5*
Total Cost of Request
Riverside Life Sciences Annual Program Review Update
Needs Worksheet
Equipment Needs Not Covered by Current Budget (Continued) (*cost includes tax, less shipping)
List Equipment or Equipment Repair Needed for Academic Year 2008-09
Please list/summarize the needs of your unit on your campus below. Please be
as specific and as brief as possible. Place items on list in order (rank) or
importance.
Annual TCO*
Cost per
item
Number
Requested
2
$700
$1,508.5*
1
$3,000
$3,232.5*
1
$4,000
$4,310*
1
$1,000
$1,077.5*
12
$125
$1,616.25*
13. SKULL BEAUCHENE
Reason: To allow students in multiple sections to have access to skull anatomy.
1
$1,200
$1,293*
14. INCUBATOR, LOW TEMPERATURE
Reason: To allow non-science major, science-major, and microbiology students
and opportunity to observe microbial growth and perform experiments.
1
$2,300
$2,478.25*
8. BONES – NATURAL SKULL
Reason: To allow anatomy/physiology students to work with a complete skull.
9. DVD/VCR/COMPUTER FOR ROOM LS 107
Reason: To allow biology students who use room LS 107 to have access to
computer and visual technology in the classroom.
10. TANK – SALTWATER AQUARIUM
Reason: To allow non-science major, and science-major students an opportunity to
observe marine ecosystem ecology, and perform experiments in marine systems.
11. TANK – FRESHWATER AQUARIUM
Reason: To allow non-science major, and science-major students an opportunity to
observe freshwater ecosystem ecology, and perform experiments in freshwater
systems.
12. FILMS FOR HEALTH SCIENCE
Reason: To allow health science students an opportunity to be exposed to
technology in the classroom, and topics which can be offered in a different manner.
14
Total Cost of Request
Riverside Life Sciences Annual Program Review Update
Needs Worksheet
Facilities Needs Not Covered by Current Building or Remodeling Projects*
Annual TCO*
List Facility Needs for Academic Year 2008-09
(Remodels, Renovations or added new facilities) Place items on list in order (rank) or
importance.
1. FACULTY OFFICE SPACE
Reason: If the Department happens to hire two full-time faculty members at this late date, one of
the faculty members will not have access to an office within the department. If the Department
does hire two people, then one additional office space will have to be constructed, and the office
fully outfitted (desk, filing cabinet, shelves, computer) in the near future.
2.
Reason:
3.
Reason:
4.
Reason:
5.
Reason:
6.
Reason:
15
Total Cost of Request
Riverside Life Sciences Annual Program Review Update
Needs Worksheet
Professional Development Needs Not Covered by Current Budget*
List Professional Development Needs for Academic Year 2008-09.
Reasons might include in response to SLO assessment findings or the need to
update curriculum. Please be as specific and as brief as possible. Some items may
not have a cost per se, but reflect the need to spend current staff time differently.
Place items on list in order (rank) or importance.
Annual TCO*
Cost per
item
Number
Requested
Total Cost of Request
1. None at this time.
Reason:
2.
Reason:
3.
Reason:
4.
Reason:
5.
Reason:
*It is recommended that you speak with your campus Faculty Development Coordinator to see if your request can be met with current
budget. If your request involves funding for assessment, program review or part time faculty please discuss it with the Associate Vice
Chancellor for Institutional Effectiveness.
16
Riverside Life Sciences Annual Program Review Update
Needs Worksheet
Library Needs Not Covered by Current Budget*
Annual TCO*
List Library Needs for Academic Year 2008-09
Please list/summarize the needs of your unit on your campus below. Please be as
specific and as brief as possible. Place items on list in order (rank) or importance.
Cost per
item
Number
Requested
Total Cost of Request
1. None at this time.
Reason:
2.
Reason:
3.
Reason:
4.
Reason:
5.
Reason:
6.
Reason:
*It is recommended that you speak with your campus Dean of the Library to see if your request can be met within the current budget,
and to get an estimated cost if new funding is needed.
17
Riverside Life Sciences Annual Program Review Update
Needs Worksheet
Student Support Services Needed by the Unit over and above what is currently provided
List Student Support Services Needs for Academic Year 2008-09
Please list/summarize the needs of your unit on your campus below. Please be as
specific and as brief as possible. Not all needs will have a cost, but may require a
reallocation of current staff time.
1. None at this time.
Reason:
2.
Reason:
3.
Reason:
4.
Reason:
5.
Reason:
6.
Reason:
18
Annual TCO*
Cost per
item
Number
Requested
Total Cost of Request
Riverside Life Sciences Annual Program Review Update
Needs Worksheet
Other Needs not covered by current support services or budget
List Misc Other Needs for Academic Year 2008-09
Please list/summarize the needs of your unit on your campus below. Please be as
specific and as brief as possible. Not all needs will have a cost, but may require a
reallocation of current staff time. Place items on list in order (rank) or importance.
1. None at this time.
Reason:
2.
Reason:
3.
Reason:
4.
Reason:
5.
Reason:
6.
Reason:
19
Annual TCO*
Cost per
item
Number
Requested
Total Cost of Request
Priority
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION FORM
l
EQUIPMENT REQUESTED
Submitted by:
NO T E :
de
Mo
Co
st
?
y
tem
th l o
ys
n
s
)
o
)
N
?
?
the
,(M s (
C)
to N)o used
kly (Y )e
? i ng (
e
(
e
)
d
e
g
s
R
)
a
?
u
(
r
e
in
n
nt
,(W se
be
n m (Y)
nti on?
ee d? logy
me Co erati )aily ne u
b
e
e
)
c
o
(N e op ed:(D han ers? pairs bas chno
pla
t
s
ic
Re
us y re rked e te
f
u
e
f
r
r
y
o
n
)o
or ofte e mo man man etwo is th
f
(N
w
w
w
rv ow
N
e d ow
NOTES
Ne
H
Se
IP/
Us
H
Ho
Ho
Title:
Dept.
Phone:
Date:
E lectronic T echnology; does not include s oftware, network infras tructure, furniture, or cons umables (toner, cartridges , etc)
20
Priority
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION FORM
l
EQUIPMENT REQUESTED
Submitted by:
NO T E :
de
Mo
st
Co
?
y
tem
th l o
ys
n
s
)
o
)
N
?
?
the
,(M s (
C)
to N)o used
kly (Y )e
? i ng (
e
(
e
)
d
e
g
s
R
)
a
?
u
(
r
e
in
n
nt
,(W se
be
n m (Y)
nti on?
ee d? logy
me Co erati )aily ne u
b
e
e
)
c
o
(N e op ed:(D han ers? pairs bas chno
pla
t
s
ic
Re
us y re rked e te
f
u
e
f
r
r
y
o
n
)o
or ofte e mo man man etwo is th
f
(N
w
w
w
rv ow
N
e d ow
NOTES
Ne
H
Se
IP/
Us
H
Ho
Ho
Title:
Dept.
Phone:
Date:
E lectronic T echnology; does not include s oftware, network infras tructure, furniture, or cons umables (toner, cartridges , etc)
21
Appendix
Data Provided by Institutional Research
Valid grade notations: A, B, C, D, F, CR, NC, W, FW, I or IX (Incomplete).
The Retention Rate is computed based upon the percent of students retained in courses out of the total enrolled in courses. The retention rate is calculated by dividing the numerator by the denominator
and multiplying by 100:

Numerator: Number of students (duplicated) with A, B, C, D, CR, NC, I

Denominator: Number of students (duplicated) with A, B, C, D, F, CR, NC, W, I
Success Rate I: Percent of students successful in courses out of total enrolled in courses. The success rate is calculated by dividing the numerator by the denominator and multiplying by 100

Numerator: Number of students (duplicated) with A, B, C, CR

Denominator: Number of students (duplicated) with A, B, C, D, F, CR, NC, W, I
Success Rate II: Percent of students successful in courses out of total enrolled in courses (excluding students who received a “W” grade). The success rate is calculated by dividing the numerator by
the denominator and multiplying by 100

Numerator: Number of students (duplicated) with A, B, C, CR

Denominator: Number of students (duplicated) with A, B, C, D, F, CR, NC, I
Anatomy/Physiology Data Set
Biology Data Set
Health Science Data Set
Microbiology
Microsoft Office
Excel Worksheet
Microsoft Office
Excel Worksheet
Microsoft Office
Excel Worksheet
Microsoft Office
Excel Worksheet
Microsoft Office
Excel Worksheet
Microsoft Office
Excel Worksheet
Microsoft Office
Excel Worksheet
Microsoft Office
Excel Worksheet
22