Access
CAMPUS-BASED RESEARCH: ACCESS
A. ACCESS. Compare the percentage of each population group that is enrolled to the
percentage of each group in the adult population within the community served.
ACCESS RATE:
Target Population(s)
# of your
college’s total
unduplicated
student
headcount
(2014-15,
primary terms
only)
24,484
% of your
college’s total
unduplicated
student
headcount
(2014-15,
primary terms
only)
100.0%
% of adult
population
(18-64) within
the Chaffey
College Service
Area
(proportion)
100.0%
Gain or loss in
proportion
(Percentage
point difference
with +/added)*
0.0%
All Students
Race/Ethnicity:
American Indian /
51
0.2%
0.2%
0.0%
Alaskan Native
Asian
1,552
6.3%
9.9%
- 3.6%
Black or African American
2,103
8.6%
6.6%
+ 2.0%
Hispanic or Latino
14,895
60.8%
53.8%
+ 7.0%
Native Hawaiian or
68
0.3%
0.2%
+ 0.1%
Other Pacific Islander
White
4,352
17.8%
26.6%
- 8.8%
Some other race
677
3.2%
0.2%
+ 3.0%
More than one race
786
3.2%
2.5%
+ 0.7%
Gender:
Males
10,085
41.2%
50.8%
- 9.6%
Females
13,728
56.1%
49.2%
+ 6.9%
Unknown Gender
671
2.7%
0.0%
+ 2.7%
Age Range:
19 or Younger
6,665
27.2%
4.4%
+ 22.8%
20 to 24 Years of Age
9,991
40.8%
12.2%
+ 28.6%
25 to 29 Years of Age
3,366
13.7%
11.6%
+ 2.1%
30 to 34 Years of Age
1,553
6.3%
11.2%
- 4.9%
35 to 39 Years of Age
950
3.9%
11.3%
- 7.4%
40 to 49 Years of Age
1,268
5.2%
21.8%
- 16.6%
50 or Older
711
2.9%
27.5%
- 24.6%
Current or Former Foster Youth
155
0.6%
1.1%
- 0.5%
Individuals with Disabilities
1,495
6.1%
7.9%
- 1.8%
Low-Income Students
17,019
69.5%
15.5%
+ 54.0%
Veterans
277
1.1%
3.2%
- 2.1%
*Calculated by subtracting the % of the adult population within the community served from the % of your college’s total
unduplicated student headcount.
According to this methodology, a ‘-3 percentage point gap or greater’ is evidence of a disproportionate impact. Though this,
much like the 80% rule, is an arbitrary designation, it serves as a reasonable strategy for identifying unequal outcomes that
would benefit from further discussion. In the table above, cells are highlighted where a -3 or greater percentage gap is
identified.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 13
Any discussion about disproportionate impact should also consider the number of students impacted. Chaffey may want to
consider prioritizing a smaller percentage point gap that is calculated for a student group with more than 100 students over a
larger percentage point equity gap calculated for a student group with fewer than 10 students. This is because rates calculated
using smaller numbers will be subject to greater variability and it may make sense to prioritize a gap that impacts a greater
number of students.
Which three student groups are experiencing the greatest gaps – and how large are these gaps (in percentage
points)?



Students 25 Years of Age or Older: 51.6% gap between the representation of this group in the Chaffey College
student population (32.0%) and their representation in the total Service Area adult population (83.6%)
Male Students: 9.6% gap between the representation of this group in the Chaffey College student population (41.2%)
and their representation in the total Service Area adult population (50.8%)
Caucasian Students: 8.8% gap between the representation of this group in the Chaffey College student population
(17.8%) and their representation in the total Service Area adult population (26.6%)
For these three student groups (as applicable) calculate the number of students needed to close the equity gap:
1
2
3
4
Percentage
expressed as
decimal
Multiply
The # of Students in
the Unduplicated
2014-15 Chaffey
College Student
Population
=
# Needed
to Achieve
Equity
Equity
Gap
Student Group
Gap in
Comparison to
Service Area
Population,
Expressed as
Percentage
Largest
Gap
Students 25 Years
of Age or Older
51.6%
.516
x
7,846
=
4,049
Second
Largest
Male Students
9.6%
.096
x
10,085
=
968
Third
Largest
Caucasian
Students
8.8%
.088
x
4,352
=
383
Proportionality Index: Bensimon and Malcom-Piqueux (2014) specify a cutoff of 0.85 to identify performance below equity
when proportionality is used as a performance measure. Employing this guideline, the following student subgroups were
identified as experience disproportionate impact on access rate when compared to their representation in the adult service
area population:







Asian Students: .63 proportionality index compared to the adult service area Asian population
Caucasian Students: .67 proportionality index compared to the adult service area Caucasian population
Male Students: .81 proportionality index compared to the adult service area Male population
Students 25 Years of Age or Older: .43 proportionality index compared to the adult service area 25-64 Year Old
population
Foster Youth Students: .54 proportionality index compared to the adult service area Foster Youth population
Students With Disabilities: .77 proportionality index compared to the adult service area Disabled population
Veteran Students: .34 proportionality index compared to the adult service area Veteran population
SUMMARY – ACCESS RATE:
Examining differences in observed student subgroup access rates relative to their representation in the adult service area
population, by the percentage gap methodology, by largest observed gaps, and by proportionality index, subgroups that are
most likely to experience disproportionate impact are:



Students 25 Years of Age or Older
Male Students
Caucasian Students
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 14
District:
Chaffey College
College:
Chaffey College
GOALS, ACTIVITIES, FUNDING AND EVALUATION: ACCESS
GOAL A.
The goal is to improve access for the following target populations identified in the college research as experiencing a disproportionate impact:
Target Population(s)
Current gap, year
Example Group
-6, 2014
Males
-9.6, 2015
White
-8.8, 2015
Adults over the age of 30
-4.9, 2015
Foster Youth
-0.5, 2015
Asians
-3.6, 2015
*Expressed as either a percentage or number
**Benchmark goals are to be decided by the institution.
Goal*
No gap
-7.6
-6.8
-3.9
No gap
-1.5
Goal Year
2020
2018
2018
2018
2017
2017
In addition to the populations with the greatest gaps the college will focus its outreach efforts on all of the groups who are in a negative gap.
Additionally, though their percentage is small, due to the size of the population, activities and efforts will also be made to increase and sustain the
access for current and former foster youth and students from low socioeconomic households. Though this last group is a majority of the students
who attend the college, a lack of accurate information can serve a barrier to access for those students.
ACTIVITIES: A. ACCESS
A.1
• Activity Type(s)
X
X
X
Outreach
Student Services or other Categorical
Program
Research and Evaluation
X
X
Student Equity Coordination/Planning
Curriculum/Course Development or
Adaptation
Professional Development
X
Instructional Support Activities
Direct Student Support
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 15
• Target Student Group(s) & # of Each Affected*:
ID
Target Group
A.1
Males
White
Asians
Foster Youth
• Activity Implementation Plan
Activity
A.1 The college will expand
outreach efforts to include
concurrently enrolled high
school students.
The college will create
partnerships with feeder and
non-traditional high schools to
ease college transitions.
A.3 The college will create
partnerships with county
foster and veteran
agencies to facilitate
access and attendance
A.4 The college will provide access
to programs and information
regarding college affordability
and assist students with
completing financial aid
processes. This will include
A.2
*Activity
Type (see
above)
1, 2, 4
# of Students Affected
10,085
4,352
1,552
155
Expected Outcome
Target
Date(s)
Responsible Parties
A.1.1 Student access to the
college begins at an earlier in
the academic career and
increases efficacy.
A.1.1: 2017
Vice President, Student Services;
Dean, Discipline & HS Partnerships;
Director, Admissions & Records,
Dean, Counseling, Director, Financial
Aid, Director of DPS
1, 2, 4
A.2.1 Increased access of
students entering college from
disproportionately impacted
groups.
A.2.1 –2016
Dean, Discipline & HS Partnerships;
Director, Admissions & Records; Dean,
Counseling
1, 2, 3, 4
A.3.1 Increased and measurable
enrollment in current and former
foster youth and veterans.
A.3.1 - 2016
Director, Special Populations & Student
Equity; Dean, Discipline & HS
Partnerships, Dean, Counseling, Director,
Admissions & Records
1, 2, 3, 4
A.4.1 – Measurable increase in
the number students applying for
and receiving financial aid,
including BOG-Waivers.
A.4.1 – 2016
Director, Financial Aid; Director, Special
Populations & Student Equity
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 16
workshops at local high
schools on FAFSA completion
and scholarships.
KEY: 1) Outreach; 2) Student Services or other Categorical Program; 3) Research and Evaluation; 4) Student Equity Coordination/Planning;
5) Curriculum/Course Development or Adaption; 6) Professional Development; 7) Instructional Support Activities; and 8) Direct Student
Support. See Student Equity Expenditure Guidelines for more information.
ID Planned Start and End Date(s)
A.1 January 2016 – continuous
A.2 March 2016 – continuous
Student Equity Funds
$80,000
$25,000
A.3 November 2015 - continuous
A.4 February 2016 - continuous
$170,000
$18,000
Other Funds**
SSSP - $10,000, General Fund - $80,000
Basic Skills Initiative - $10,000, General
Fund - $80,000
EOPS – $102,000
BFAP - $8,000, General Fund – $20,000
• Link to Goal
ID Link to Goal
A.1 By informing student about attending college at a younger age the likelihood of attendance increases and informs students
and families of the potential of college.
A.2 Working with the high schools’ administrations provides a greater possibility of disseminating accurate information and
thus seamless transitions to the college.
A.3 Foster youth and veterans can represent some of the most at risk populations and unlikely to consider college. Partnering
with agencies that already have their trust increases the possibility of them accessing college.
A.4 Since students consider college affordability a barrier, providing outreach information and assisting students in applying for
financial aid increases the possibility of access.
• Evaluation
For each activity associated with Student Equity Indicator #1 (Access), Chaffey College has identified data collection timelines and measurable
metrics that directly relate to and assess expected outcomes:
 Activity A.1: Outreach efforts to concurrently enrolled high school students predominantly occur in the spring. Chaffey College will examine
placement recommendation data for students who enroll in the subsequent fall semester to determine placement recommendation level relative to
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 17
participation in outreach efforts. As these students progress through Chaffey College, the District will utilize Student Success Scorecard Basic Skills
Improvement data downloaded from Data on Demand to determine whether a higher percentage of students exposed to outreach efforts
subsequently progress through ESL and Basic Skills course sequences.
 Activity A.2: The Chaffey College Office of Institutional Research (OIR) will examine MIS course (CB), section (XB), and enrollment (SX) data and
merge this information against employee data (EB and EJ) to determine whether the representation of historically underrepresented faculty
teaching ESL and Basic Skills courses increases over time. Comparisons will be made within department and relative to overall faculty demographic
characteristics. Data files are reported annually (usually in September/October), allowing for on-going systemic longitudinal analyses.
 Activity A.3: Chaffey College will utilize MIS special population (SG) data elements SG01 (Military Status) and SG03 (Student Foster Youth Status) to
determine whether increases in enrollment occur among these two student populations. Data files are available at the conclusion of every
semester.
 Activity A.4: Extracting data from Chaffey’s administrative computing system (Colleague), the OIR will identify whether increases in financial aid
applications are occurring. Data will be disaggregated by student demographic characteristics in order to determine whether observed
differences/changes in financial aid applications exist among student subpopulations. The OIR will also examine the annual Chancellor’s Office MIS
financial aid file (SF) to examine similar outcomes among financial aid recipients, specifically BOG grantees.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 18
Success Indicator: Course Completion
CAMPUS-BASED RESEARCH: COURSE COMPLETION
B. COURSE COMPLETION. The ratio of the number of credit courses that students, by
population group, complete compared to the number of courses in which students in that
group are enrolled on the census day of the term. Calculate course completion rates by
dividing:
COURSE COMPLETION RATE:
Target Population(s)
The # of
courses
students
enrolled in
& were
present in
on census
day in base
year
The # of
courses in
which
students
earned an
A, B, C, or
credit out of

The % of courses
passed (earned A,
B, C, or credit) out
of the courses
students enrolled
in & were present
in on census day in
base year
Total (all
student
average)
pass rate*
Comparison to
the all student
average
(Percentage
point
difference
with +/added)**
All Students
101,827
73,017
71.7%
Race/Ethnicity:
American Indian /
188
132
70.2%
71.7%
- 1.5%
Alaskan Native
Asian
6,667
5,340
80.1%
71.7%
+ 8.4%
Black or African American
8,884
5,851
65.9%
71.7%
- 5.8%
Hispanic or Latino
61,217
42,814
69.9%
71.7%
- 1.8%
Native Hawaiian or
297
185
62.3%
71.7%
- 9.4%
Other Pacific Islander
White
18,475
14,374
77.8%
71.7%
+ 6.1%
Some other race
2,585
1,866
72.2%
71.7%
+ 0.5%
More than one race
3,514
2,455
69.9%
71.7%
- 1.8%
Gender:
Males
42,065
29,499
70.1%
71.7%
- 1.6%
Females
56,945
41,543
73.0%
71.7%
+ 1.3%
Unknown Gender
2,817
1,975
70.1%
71.7%
- 1.6%
Age Range:
19 or Younger
31,131
21,196
68.1%
71.7%
- 3.6%
20 to 24 Years of Age
43,438
30,710
70.7%
71.7%
- 1.0%
25 to 29 Years of Age
12,648
9,557
75.6%
71.7%
+ 3.9%
30 to 34 Years of Age
5,173
4,024
77.8%
71.7%
+ 6.1%
35 to 39 Years of Age
3,266
2,615
80.1%
71.7%
+ 8.4%
40 to 49 Years of Age
4,137
3,302
79.8%
71.7%
+ 8.1%
50 or Older
2,034
1,612
79.3%
71.7%
+ 7.6%
Current or Former Foster Youth
727
384
52.8%
71.7%
- 18.9%
Individuals with Disabilities
5,609
3,862
68.9%
71.7%
- 2.8%
Low-Income Students
75,759
56,592
74.7%
71.7%
+ 3.0%
Veterans
1,418
1,074
75.7%
71.7%
+ 4.0%
*The all student average is proposed as the comparison point for all groups. Therefore, this rate would be written in all of the
orange boxes and used to calculate the equity gap for each group (the last column on the right).
**Calculated by subtracting the average rate of courses passed from the student group’s rate of courses passed.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 19
According to this methodology, a ‘-3 percentage point gap or greater’ is evidence of a disproportionate impact. Though this,
much like the 80% rule, is an arbitrary designation, it serves as a reasonable strategy for identifying unequal outcomes that
would benefit from further discussion. In the table above, cells are highlighted where a -3 or greater percentage gap is
identified.
Any discussion about disproportionate impact should also consider the number of students impacted. Chaffey may want to
consider prioritizing a smaller percentage point gap that is calculated for a student group with more than 100 students over a
larger percentage point equity gap calculated for a student group with fewer than 10 students. This is because rates calculated
using smaller numbers will be subject to greater variability and it may make sense to prioritize a gap that impacts a greater
number of students.
Which three student groups are experiencing the greatest gaps – and how large are these gaps
(in percentage points)?



Current or Former Foster Youth: 18.9% gap between the success rate of this group (52.8%) and the total student
population (71.7%)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders: 9.4% gap between the success rate of this group (62.3%) and the total
student population (71.7%)
Black or African American: 5.8% gap between the success rate of this group (65.9%) and the total student population
(71.7%)
For these three student groups (as applicable) calculate the number of students ‘lost’, which is
also the number of students who, if they had succeeded, would have closed the equity gap:
1
2
Percentage
expressed as
decimal
25%
becomes .25
3
4
Multiply
the # of courses
students enrolled in
& were present in
on census day in
base year
=
Number of
Students
“Lost”
Equity
Gap
Student Group
Gap in
comparison to
the Average,
Expressed as
Percentage
Largest
Gap
Foster Youth
18.9%
.189
x
727
=
137
Second
Largest
Pacific Islander
9.4%
.094
x
297
=
28
Third
Largest
African American
5.8%
.058
x
8,884
=
515
80% RULE ANALYSIS:
While the previous table identifies specific sub-group performance relative to the overall student population, the Office of
Institutional Research also employed the “80% Rule” to examine subgroup performance relative to the highest performing
group in each category. Employing the 80% Rule, the following groups were identified as performing at less than 80% of the
highest performing group (in the case of unique student populations (i.e., Veterans, Foster Youth, DPS Students, and Low
Income), group performance was compared against the total student population):


Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders: 62.3% course success rate is 77.8% of the highest performing subgroup
(Asian students, 80.1%)
Current or Former Foster Youth: 52.8% course success rate is 73.6% of the total student population average (71.7%)
In addition to examining the 2014-15 (primary terms only) success rate differences between subgroups and the total student
population, the Office of Institutional Research also examined three-year trend data (2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15) to determine
whether differences observed in the 2014-15 academic year represented increases/decreases in observed performance
outcome differences. Tables 1 through 4 depict observed three-year differences between subgroups and the total student
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 20
population related to race/ethnicity (table 1), gender (table 2), age range (table 3), and disability status, foster youth status,
veterans status, and economically disadvantaged status (table 4).
SUMMARY – COURSE COMPLETION:
Examining differences in observed subgroup course completion rates relative to the general student population, by the
percentage gap methodology, by largest observed gaps, by 80% Rule that compares subgroups against the highest performing
subgroup, and over time (last 3-year data), subgroups that are most likely to experience disproportionate impact are:



Foster Youth
Pacific Islander Students
African American Students
It should be noted that course completion rate discrepancies observed between African American students and the general
student population appear to be declining. In 2012-13, the observed differences between African American students and the
general student population was 9.9%. This observed difference declined to 8.2% in 2013-14. In 2014-15, the observed
difference was 5.8%. While still one of the more pronounced observed differences, in examining the 80% Rule the difference
between African American students and the highest performing subgroup within this category (Asian students) did not exceed
the 80% threshold.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 21
District:
Chaffey College
College:
Chaffey College
GOALS, ACTIVITIES, FUNDING AND EVALUATION: COURSE COMPLETION
GOAL B.
The goal is to improve course completion for the following target populations identified in the college research as experiencing a disproportionate
impact:
Target Population(s)
Current gap, year
Goal*
Goal Year
Example Group
-14, 2014
Gap no > -6
2020
Foster Youth
-18.9, 2015
Gap no less than -15
2018
Pacific Islander
-9.4, 2015
Gap no less than -8
2018
African American
-5.8, 2015
Gap no less than -4
2018
*Expressed as either a percentage or number.
**Benchmark goals are to be decided by the institution.
ACTIVITIES: B. COURSE COMPLETION
B.1
• Activity Type(s):
x
x
x
Outreach
Student Services or other Categorical
Program
Research and Evaluation
X
x
x
• Target Student Group(s) & # of Each Affected*:
ID
Target Group(s)
B.1
Foster Youth
B.1
Pacific Islanders
B.1
African Americans
Student Equity Coordination/Planning
Curriculum/Course Development or
Adaptation
Professional Development
x
x
Instructional Support Activities
Direct Student Support
# of Student Enrollments Affected
727
297
8,884
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 22
District:
Chaffey College
College:
Chaffey College
• Activity Implementation Plan
Activity
B.1 The college will collect
disaggregated data to identify the
courses in which the target
populations are experiencing the
least amount of success.
B.2 The college plans to increase the
level of outreach provided by
faculty advisors as it relates to the
targeted populations.
B.3 The college will expand professional
development opportunities through
the Faculty Success Center to
research barriers experienced by
the targeted population and
resilience factors.
*Activity
Type (see
above)
3, 4
1, 4, 7, 8
3, 6
B.4 The college will expand the
Supplemental Instruction program
and also work toward ensuring that
the SI Leaders represent the diverse
student population.
7, 8
B.5 The college will facilitate mentoring
1, 4, 8
Expected Outcome
Target
Date(s)
B.1.1 A complete data set
that allows the college to
make informed decisions
about training and
curriculum development.
B.2.1 A measured increase
in the number of students
engaged formally with
faculty advisors.
B.3.1 A measured increase
as it relates to equity
matters in 1) the number of
faculty participating in
professional development,
and 2) new faculty
participating in professional
development
B.4.1 Increased participation
in supplemental instruction.
B.1.1: 2017
Associate Superintendent, Instruction &
Institutional Effectiveness; Dean,
Institutional Research; School Deans
B.2.1: 2017
Associate Dean of Instruction &
Institutional Effectiveness; Dean,
Instructional Support; Coordinators,
Faculty Advising
Associate Superintendent of Instruction &
Institutional Effectiveness; Dean,
Instructional Support; Dean, Institutional
Research
B.4.2 A measured increase
in course completion success
by the target populations
and all students
participating.
B.5.1 – An increase in
B.4.2 – 2017
B.3.1 –2017
Responsible Parties
B.4.1 – 2016 Dean, Instructional Support; Dean,
Institutional Research
B.5.1 – 2017 Vice President, Student Services; Director,
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 23
District:
Chaffey College
College:
Chaffey College
and role modeling for foster youth
campus engagement and
Special Populations; Dean, Counseling;
as overseen by the Office of the Vice
course loads.
Coordinator, EOPS
President of Student Services.
B.6 The college plans to use the
3
B.6.1 – Informed data set
B.6.1 – 2016 Dean, Counseling and Student Support
explaining
perceived
barriers
Success and Support Dean, Institutional
research conducted by internal and
for target students.
Research; Associate Superintendent,
external agencies to conduct focus
Instruction & Institutional Effectiveness;
groups with the targeted population
B.6.2 – Targeted professional B.6.2 – 2018 Vice President, Student Services
to obtain a better understanding of
development aimed at the
their barriers experienced, and to
specific barriers identified in
develop professional development
B.6.1.
training courses for both faculty and
staff to help remove those barriers.
B.7 The college plans to review the data 3; 5
B.7.1 – Course offerings
B.7.1 - 2017 Dean, Institutional Research; Associate
as it relates to accelerated learning
matching the success of the
Superintendent, Instruction &
of the target populations and to
students.
Institutional Effectiveness
research strategies of increasing the
enrollment of the targeted
population into more accelerated
courses.
KEY: 1) Outreach; 2) Student Services or other Categorical Program; 3) Research and Evaluation; 4) Student Equity Coordination/Planning; 5)
Curriculum/Course Development or Adaption; 6) Professional Development; 7) Instructional Support Activities; and 8) Direct Student Support. See
Student Equity Expenditure Guidelines for more information.
ID
B.1
B.2
B.3
B.4
B.5
B.6
Planned Start and End Date(s)
Fall 2015 – Spring 2017
Fall 2015 – Spring 2017
Spring 2016 – Summer 2017
Fall 2015 – Summer 2017
Spring 2016 – Spring 2017
Spring 2016 – Summer 2018
Student Equity Funds
$61,170
$63,448
$20,000
$368,391
$10,000
$61,170
Other Funds**
General Fund - $120,000
General Fund - $50,000, BSI - $15,000
General Fund - $104,000
General Fund - $500,000
General Fund - $104,000, EOPS – $100,000
General Fund - $121,000
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 24
District:
B.7
Chaffey College
Fall 2015 – Spring 2017
College:
$61,170
Chaffey College
General Fund - $121,000
• Link to Goal
ID
Link to Goal
B.1
The data collection will assist the college with developing specific intervention strategies for the target populations to achieve success in
completing their courses.
B.2
Faculty Advising is a new program implemented by the college. The program was developed based on the student engagement research.
The research indicates that student success rates are directly related to the number of outside of class interactions between student and
faculty. The faculty members participating in the program are trained to help students explore careers and higher education in their
areas of expertise. Engaging with students, particularly through the faculty advising program, provides students a deeper level of
engagement and connection and assists them in determining to persist.
B.3
Research indicates that academic success is highly dependent on students’ experiences in the classroom. Therefore, the college plans to
improve the classroom engagement experienced by the targeted population. The research will be used to provide training on specific
classroom engagement techniques to assist the targeted population with course completion.
B.4
The data collected by the college indicates that students who participate in Supplemental Instruction have higher success rates
compared to students who do not participate in the program.
B.5
Connecting students to the college environment and having faculty and staff who personally engage with them increases their likelihood
of continuing in courses and persisting to goal completion.
B.6
Focus groups allow the students to explain in their voices where and why they are being unsuccessful and allow the college to focus
training to remove those barriers.
B.7
The data collected by the college indicates that the success rates of students enrolled in accelerated (Fast-Track) courses are higher
compared to students not enrolled in accelerated courses.
• Evaluation
For each activity associated with Student Equity Indicator #3 (Course Completion), Chaffey College has identified data collection timelines and
measurable metrics that directly relate to and assess expected outcomes:
 Activity B.1: To address this activity, the OIR will annually examine MIS course (CB), section (XB), enrollment (SX), and Student Basic (SB) data to
identify courses where target populations experience the lowest success and retention rates relative to the college-wide average in these courses. A
comprehensive report will be created for each subgroup population and reported to President’s Equity Council annually.
 Activity B.2: As part of the District’s expansion of Faculty Advising, the OIR will identify the number of students who annually participate in student
advising. The District is currently exploring various student retention and data collection systems that allow data collection to occur at diverse
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 25
District:
Chaffey College





College:
Chaffey College
locations (e.g., identified meeting places, faculty offices, etc.). Number of students and faculty engaging in faculty advising will be documented and
reported annually.
Activity B.3: Working with the Chaffey College Faculty Success Center, the OIR will identify the number of full-time and adjunct faculty who
participate in Faculty Success Center professional development opportunities designed to mitigate student achievement gap and equity issues. The
number of faculty who participate in these professional development opportunities – specifically, new faculty – will be documented. As it relates to
the expected outcome, the OIR will examine data on an annual basis to determine whether increase in faculty participation has occurred.
Activity B.4.1 and B.4.2: Utilizing the District’s Success Center tracking system (which is also used to record each unique student contact with a
Supplemental Instruction (SI) leaders), the OIR will identify students enrolled in courses supported by Supplemental Instruction (SI) who access SI
services. Course data (reported through MIS) and SI contact data are updated at the end of each semester. Merging these two data sources, the
OIR will examine performance outcomes in SI-supported courses of students who do/do not access SI services. SI service access and performance
outcome comparisons will also be examined by student demographic characteristics. Research findings will be reported annually.
Activity B.5: Working with the Director of Special Populations, the OIR will ensure that all eligible Foster Youth students are reported through MIS
data element SG03 (Student Foster Youth Status). Utilizing this codified data element, the OIR will examine course load as defined by MIS data
element SXD3 (Enrollment Units Attempted) to determine whether Foster Youth students are attempting a higher course load. Working with the
Director of Special Populations, the OIR will also survey Foster Youth who have participated in mentoring/role modeling services to determine
whether Hope, Growth Mindset, and other non-cognitive factors have increased (non-cognitive factors are embedded in the District’s assessment
process, providing baseline data for all first-time, no-prior college experience students who participate in assessment).
Activity B.6.1 and B.6.2: Utilizing Student Equity Indicator data, evidence-based outcomes associated with Student Equity Plan activities, student
focus group findings, and research-based findings provided by partnering external entities (e.g., Minority Male Community College Collaborative
(M2C2); Gallup Organization; Center for Community College Student Engagement; etc.), President’s Equity Council will examine both qualitative and
quantitative data and work with the Faculty Success Center and Professional Development Office to formulate training opportunities designed to
ameliorate observed disproportionate impact and barriers for underrepresented students. Training activities will be predicated on evidence-based
practices and developed on an on-going basis.
Activity B.7: Extracting data from Chaffey’s administrative computing system (Colleague), the OIR will identify accelerated learning courses.
Accelerated learning course sections will be compared annually against comparable coterminous sections to determine whether differences exist in
course success and retention rates. Data will be disaggregated by student demographic characteristics in order to determine whether observed
differences in course success and retention rates positively benefit specific student subpopulations.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 26
District:
Chaffey College
College:
Chaffey College
Success Indicator: ESL and
Basic Skills Completion
CAMPUS-BASED RESEARCH: ESL AND BASIC SKILLS COMPLETION
C. ESL AND BASIC SKILLS COMPLETION. The ratio of the number of students by population
group who complete a degree-applicable course after having completed the final ESL or
basic skills course compared to the number of those students who complete such a final ESL
or basic skills course. The college believes it is valuable to not only look at the aggregate of
ESL and Basic Skills Completion, but to also look at each of the basic skills individually to
better affect students disproportionality impacted and create goals and activities for each
of those areas.
ENGLISH BASIC SKILLS COMPLETION:
Target Population(s)
All Students
Race/Ethnicity:
American Indian /
Alaskan Native
Asian
Black or African American
Hispanic or Latino
Native Hawaiian or
Other Pacific Islander
White
Some other race
More than one race
Gender:
Males
Females
Unknown Gender
Age Range:
19 or Younger
20 to 24 Years of Age
25 to 29 Years of Age
30 to 34 Years of Age
35 to 39 Years of Age
40 to 49 Years of Age
50 or Older
Current or Former Foster Youth
Individuals with Disabilities
The # of
students
who
complete a
final English
basic skills
course with
an A, B, C or
credit
3,668
The number of
students out of
 (the
denominator)
that complete a
degree
applicable course
with an A, B, C,
or credit
1,598
The rate of
progress from
English Basic
Skills to
degreeapplicable
course
completion
Total (all
student
average)
English
Basic Skills
Progression
Rate*
Comparison to
the all student
average
(Percentage
point
difference
with +/added)**
43.6
26
7
26.9%
43.6%
Insufficient data
191
448
2,007
95
174
858
49.7%
38.8%
42.8%
43.6%
43.6%
43.6%
+ 6.1%
- 4.8%
- 0.8%
22
11
50.0%
43.6%
Insufficient data
733
241
n/a
354
99
n/a
48.3%
41.1%
n/a
43.6%
43.6%
43.6%
+ 4.7%
- 2.5%
n/a
1,468
2,140
60
563
`1,005
30
38.4%
47.0%
50.0%
43.6%
43.6%
43.6%
- 5.2%
+ 3.4%
+ 6.4%
2,231
739
287
129
101
135
46
2
201
1,083
264
110
48
28
55
10
0
96
48.5%
35.7%
38.3%
37.2%
27.7%
40.7%
21.7%
0.0%
47.8
43.6%
43.6%
43.6%
43.6%
43.6%
43.6%
43.6%
43.6%
43.6%
+ 4.9%
- 7.9%
- 5.3%
- 6.4%
- 15.9%
- 2.9%
- 21.9%
Insufficient Data
+ 4.2%
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 27
District:
Chaffey College
College:
Chaffey College
Low-Income Students
2,171
1,007
46.4
43.6%
+ 2.8%
Veterans
50
29
58.0
43.6%
+ 14.4%
*The all student average is proposed as the comparison point for all groups. Therefore, this rate would be written in all of the
orange boxes and used to calculate the equity gap for each group (the last column on the right).
**Calculated by subtracting the average English Basic Skills Progression Rate from the each subgroup’s English Basic Skills
Progression Rate.
According to this methodology, a ‘-3 percentage point gap or greater’ is evidence of a disproportionate impact. Though this,
much like the 80% rule, is an arbitrary designation, it serves as a reasonable strategy for identifying unequal outcomes that
would benefit from further discussion. In the table above, cells are highlighted where a -3 or greater percentage gap is
identified.
Any discussion about disproportionate impact should also consider the number of students impacted. Chaffey may want to
consider prioritizing a smaller percentage point gap that is calculated for a student group with more than 100 students over a
larger percentage point equity gap calculated for a student group with fewer than 10 students. This is because rates calculated
using smaller numbers will be subject to greater variability and it may make sense to prioritize a gap that impacts a greater
number of students.
Which three student groups are experiencing the greatest gaps – and how large are these gaps (in percentage
points)?



Students 20 Years of Age or Older: 7.8% gap between the English Basic Skills Completion Rate of this group (35.8%)
and the total student population (43.6%)
Male Students: 5.2% gap between the English Basic Skills Completion Rate of this group (38.4%) and the total
student population (43.6%)
Black or African American Students: 4.8% gap between the success rate of this group (38.8%) and the total student
population (43.6%)
For these three student groups (as applicable) calculate the number of students ‘lost’, which is also the number of
students who, if they had progressed, would have closed the equity gap:
1
2
3
4
Percentage
Expressed as
Decimal
Multiply
The # of students
who complete a
English basic skills
course with an A,
B, C or credit
=
Number of
Students
“Lost”
Equity
Gap
Student Group
Gap in
Comparison to
the Average,
Expressed as
Percentage
Largest
Gap
Students 20 Years
of Age or Older
7.8%
.078
x
1,437
=
112
Second
Largest
Male Students
5.2%
.052
x
1,468
=
76
Third
Largest
African American
4.8%
.048
x
448
=
22
80% RULE ANALYSIS:
While the previous table identifies specific sub-group performance relative to the overall student population, the Office of
Institutional Research also employed the “80% Rule” to examine subgroup performance relative to the highest performing
group in each category. Employing the 80% Rule, the following groups were identified as performing at less than 80% of the
highest performing group (in the case of unique student populations (i.e., Veterans, Foster Youth, DPS Students, and Low
Income), group performance was compared against the total student population):

Black or African American: 38.8% English Basic Skills Completion Rate is 78.1% of the highest performing subgroup
(Asian students, 49.7%)
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 28

Students 20 Years of Age or Older: 35.8% English Basic Skills Completion Rate is 73.8% of the highest performing
subgroup (Students 19 or Younger, 48.5%)
In addition to examining the 2014-15 English Basic Skills Completion Rate difference between subgroups and the total student
population, the Office of Institutional Research also examined three-year trend data (2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15) to determine
whether differences observed in the 2014-15 academic year represented increases/decreases in observed performance
outcome differences. Tables 5 through 8 depict observed three-year differences between subgroups and the total student
population related to race/ethnicity (table 5), gender (table 6), age range (table 7), and disability status, foster youth status,
veterans status, and economically disadvantaged status (table 8) (NOTE: data is suppressed for subgroup populations with 10
or fewer cases).
SUMMARY – ENGLISH BASIC SKILLS COMPLETION RATE:
Examining differences in observed subgroup English Basic Skills Completion Rates relative to the general student population, by
the percentage gap methodology, by largest observed gaps, by 80% Rule that compares subgroups against the highest
performing subgroup, and over time (last 3-year data), subgroups that are most likely to experience disproportionate impact
are:
 Students 20 Years of Age or Older
 Male Students
 African American Students
It should be noted that English Basic Skills Completion Rate discrepancies observed between African American students and the
general student population appear to be declining. In 2012-13, the observed differences between African American students
and the general student population was 8.1%. While the observed 2013-14 difference increased to 8.9% in 2013-14, in 201415, the observed difference was 4.8%. While still one of the more pronounced observed differences, in examining the 80% Rule
the difference between African American students and the highest performing subgroup within this category (Asian students)
did not exceed the 80% threshold.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 29
MATHEMATICS BASIC SKILLS COMPLETION:
Target Population(s)
The # of
students
who
complete a
Math basic
skills course
with an A,
B, C or
credit
The number of
students out of
 (the
denominator)
that complete a
degree
applicable course
with an A, B, C,
or credit
The rate of
progress from
Math Basic
Skills to
degreeapplicable
course
completion
Total (all
student
average)
Math Basic
Skills
Progression
Rate*
Comparison to
the all student
average
(Percentage
point
difference
with +/added)**
All Students
2,925
963
32.9
Race/Ethnicity:
American Indian /
18
5
27.8%
32.9%
Insufficient Data
Alaskan Native
Asian
129
60
46.5%
32.9%
+ 13.6%
Black or African American
362
89
24.6%
32.9%
- 8.3%
Hispanic or Latino
1,554
509
32.8%
32.9%
- 0.1%
Native Hawaiian or
13
4
30.8%
32.9%
Insufficient Data
Other Pacific Islander
White
636
225
35.4%
32.9%
+ 2.5%
Some other race
213
71
33.3%
32.9%
+ 0.4%
More than one race
n/a
n/a
n/a
32.9%
n/a
Gender:
Males
1,091
335
30.7%
32.9%
- 2.2%
Females
1,790
619
34.6%
32.9%
+ 1.7%
Unknown Gender
44
9
20.5%
32.9%
- 12.4%
Age Range:
19 or Younger
1,580
581
36.8%
32.9%
+ 3.9%
20 to 24 Years of Age
665
176
26.5%
32.9%
- 6.4%
25 to 29 Years of Age
283
99
35.0%
32.9%
+ 2.1%
30 to 34 Years of Age
132
39
29.5%
32.9%
- 3.4%
35 to 39 Years of Age
88
22
25.0%
32.9%
- 7.9%
40 to 49 Years of Age
137
40
29.2%
32.9%
- 3.7%
50 or Older
40
6
15.0%
32.9%
- 17.9%
Current or Former Foster Youth
2
0
0.0%
32.9%
Insufficient Data
Individuals with Disabilities
191
39
20.4%
32.9%
- 12.5%
Low-Income Students
1,801
617
34.3%
32.9%
+ 1.4%
Veterans
56
22
39.3%
32.9%
+ 6.4%
*The all student average is proposed as the comparison point for all groups. Therefore, this rate would be written in all of the
orange boxes and used to calculate the equity gap for each group (the last column on the right).
**Calculated by subtracting the average Math Basic Skills Progression Rate from the each subgroup’s Math Basic Skills
Progression Rate.
According to this methodology, a ‘-3 percentage point gap or greater’ is evidence of a disproportionate impact. Though this,
much like the 80% rule, is an arbitrary designation, it serves as a reasonable strategy for identifying unequal outcomes that
would benefit from further discussion. In the table above, cells are highlighted where a -3 or greater percentage gap is
identified.
Any discussion about disproportionate impact should also consider the number of students impacted. Chaffey may want to
consider prioritizing a smaller percentage point gap that is calculated for a student group with more than 100 students over a
larger percentage point equity gap calculated for a student group with fewer than 10 students. This is because rates calculated
using smaller numbers will be subject to greater variability and it may make sense to prioritize a gap that impacts a greater
number of students.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 30
Which three student groups are experiencing the greatest gaps – and how large are these gaps (in percentage
points)?



Students 50 Years of Age or Older: 17.9% gap between the Math Basic Skills Completion Rate of this group (15.0%)
and the total student population (32.9%)
Students With Disabilities: 12.5% gap between the Math Basic Skills Completion Rate of this group (20.4%) and the
total student population (32.9%)
Black or African American: 8.3% gap between the Math Basic Skills Completion Rate of this group (24.6%) and the
total student population (32.9%)
For these three student groups (as applicable) calculate the number of students ‘lost’, which is also the number of
students who, if they had progressed, would have closed the equity gap:
1
2
3
4
Percentage
Expressed as
Decimal
Multiply
The # of students
who complete a
Math basic skills
course with an A,
B, C or credit
=
Number of
Students
“Lost”
Equity
Gap
Student Group
Gap in
Comparison to
the Average,
Expressed as
Percentage
Largest
Gap
Students 50 Years
of Age or Older
17.9%
.179
x
727
=
137
Second
Largest
Students With
Disabilities
12.5%
.125
x
297
=
28
Third
Largest
African American
8.3%
.083
x
8,884
=
515
80% RULE ANALYSIS:
While the previous table identifies specific sub-group performance relative to the overall student population, the Office of
Institutional Research also employed the “80% Rule” to examine subgroup performance relative to the highest performing
group in each category. Employing the 80% Rule, the following groups were identified as performing at less than 80% of the
highest performing group (in the case of unique student populations (i.e., Veterans, Foster Youth, DPS Students, and Low
Income), group performance was compared against the total student population):





Black or African American: 24.6% Math Basic Skills Completion Rate is 69.5% of the highest performing subgroup
(Caucasian students, 35.4% (NOTE: while the Asian student subgroup exhibited a higher Math Basic Skills Completion
Rate (46.5%) it was not selected as a reference group due to the small N))
Students 20 to 24 Years of Age: 26.5% Math Basic Skills Completion Rate is 72.0% of the highest performing
subgroup (Students 19 or Younger, 36.8%)
Students 35 to 39 Years of Age: 25.0% Math Basic Skills Completion Rate is 67.9% of the highest performing
subgroup (Students 19 or Younger, 36.8%)
Students 50 Years of Age or Older: 15.0% Math Basic Skills Completion Rate is 45.7% of the highest performing
subgroup (Students 19 or Younger, 36.8%)
Students With Disabilities: 20.4% Math Basic Skills Completion Rate is 62.0% of the total student population (32.9%)
In addition to examining the 2014-15 Math Basic Skills Completion Rate differences between subgroups and the total student
population, the Office of Institutional Research also examined three-year trend data (2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15) to determine
whether differences observed in the 2014-15 academic year represented increases/decreases in observed performance
outcome differences. Tables 9 through 12 depict observed three-year differences between subgroups and the total student
population related to race/ethnicity (table 9), gender (table 10), age range (table 11), and disability status, foster youth status,
veterans status, and economically disadvantaged status (table 12). (NOTE: data is suppressed for subgroup populations with 10
or fewer cases).
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 31
SUMMARY – MATH BASIC SKILLS COURSE COMPLETION:
Examining differences in observed subgroup Math Basic Skills Completion Rates relative to the general student population, by
the percentage gap methodology, by largest observed gaps, by 80% Rule that compares subgroups against the highest
performing subgroup, and over time (last 3-year data), subgroups that are most likely to experience disproportionate impact
are:



Students With Disabilities
African American Students
Students 20 to 24 Years of Age; 35 to 39 Years of Age; and 50 Years of Age or Older
It should be noted that Math Basic Skills Completion Rate discrepancies observed between African American students and the
general student population appear to be declining. In 2012-13, the observed differences between African American students
and the general student population was 11.4%. This observed difference declined to 9.0% in 2013-14. In 2014-15, the
observed difference was 8.3%. Contrary to this finding, the observed discrepancies between Students with Disabilities and the
general student population appears to be increasing on this particular metric. In 2012-13, the observed differences between
Students with Disabilities and the general student population was 6.8%. This observed difference increased to 8.8% in 2013-14.
In 2014-15, the observed difference was 12.5%. While the pattern varies in regard to age, similar findings were observed
among the identified age groups. In all instances the observed discrepancies between students 20 to 24 years of age, 35 to 39
years of age, and 50 years of age or older were higher in 2014-15 than in prior years.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 32
ESL BASIC SKILLS COMPLETION:
Target Population(s)
The # of
students
who
complete an
ESL basic
skills course
with an A,
B, C or
credit
The number of
students out of
 (the
denominator)
that complete a
degree
applicable course
with an A, B, C,
or credit
The rate of
progress from
ESL Basic Skills
to degreeapplicable
course
completion
Total (all
student
average)
ESL Basic
Skills
Progression
Rate*
Comparison to
the all student
average
(Percentage
point
difference
with +/added)**
All Students
243
34
14.0%
Race/Ethnicity:
American Indian /
n/a
n/a
n/a
14.0%
n/a
Alaskan Native
Asian
58
15
25.9%
14.0%
+ 11.9%
Black or African American
4
0
0.0%
14.0%
Insufficient Data
Hispanic or Latino
140
13
9.3%
14.0%
- 4.7%
Native Hawaiian or
1
1
100.0%
14.0%
Insufficient Data
Other Pacific Islander
White
9
3
33.3%
14.0%
Insufficient Data
Some other race
31
2
6.5%
14.0%
Insufficient Data
More than one race
n/a
n/a
n/a
14.0%
n/a
Gender:
Males
66
11
16.7%
14.0%
+ 2.7%
Females
166
22
13.1%
14.0%
- 0.9%
Unknown Gender
9
1
11.1%
14.0%
Insufficient Data
Age Range:
19 or Younger
24
12
50.0%
14.0%
Insufficient Data
20 to 24 Years of Age
23
8
34.8%
14.0%
Insufficient Data
25 to 29 Years of Age
26
3
11.5%
14.0%
Insufficient Data
30 to 34 Years of Age
27
2
7.4%
14.0%
Insufficient Data
35 to 39 Years of Age
39
4
10.3%
14.0%
- 3.7%
40 to 49 Years of Age
79
3
3.8%
14.0%
- 10.2%
50 or Older
25
2
8.0%
14.0%
Insufficient Data
Current or Former Foster Youth
n/a
n/a
n/a
14.0%
n/a
Individuals with Disabilities
6
0
0.0%
14.0%
Insufficient Data
Low-Income Students
94
18
19.1%
14.0%
+ 5.1%
Veterans
n/a
n/a
n/a
14.0%
n/a
*The all student average is proposed as the comparison point for all groups. Therefore, this rate would be written in all of the
orange boxes and used to calculate the equity gap for each group (the last column on the right).
**Calculated by subtracting the average ESL Basic Skills Progression Rate from the each subgroup’s ESL Basic Skills Progression
Rate.
According to this methodology, a ‘-3 percentage point gap or greater’ is evidence of a disproportionate impact. Though this,
much like the 80% rule, is an arbitrary designation, it serves as a reasonable strategy for identifying unequal outcomes that
would benefit from further discussion. In the table above, cells are highlighted where a -3 or greater percentage gap is
identified.
Any discussion about disproportionate impact should also consider the number of students impacted. Chaffey may want to
consider prioritizing a smaller percentage point gap that is calculated for a student group with more than 100 students over a
larger percentage point equity gap calculated for a student group with fewer than 10 students. This is because rates calculated
using smaller numbers will be subject to greater variability and it may make sense to prioritize a gap that impacts a greater
number of students.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 33
Which three student groups are experiencing the greatest gaps – and how large are these gaps (in percentage
points)?



Students 25 Years of Age or Older: 6.9% gap between the ESL Basic Skills Completion Rate of this group (7.1%) and
the total student population (14.0%)
Hispanic or Latino Students: 4.7% gap between the ESL Basic Skills Completion Rate of this group (9.3%) and the total
student population (14.0%)
Female Students: 0.9% gap between the ESL Basic Skills Completion Rate of this group (13.1%) and the total student
population (14.0%)
For these three student groups (as applicable) calculate the number of students ‘lost’, which is also the number of
students who, if they had progressed, would have closed the equity gap:
1
2
Percentage
expressed as
decimal
3
4
Multiply
The # of students
who complete a
Math basic skills
course with an A,
B, C or credit
=
Number of
Students
“Lost”
Equity
Gap
Student Group
Gap in
comparison to
the Average,
Expressed as
Percentage
Largest
Gap
Students 25 Years
of Age or Older
6.9%
.069
x
196
=
14
Second
Largest
Hispanic or Latino
Students
4.7%
.047
x
140
=
7
Third
Largest
Female Students
0.9%
.009
x
166
=
2
80% RULE ANALYSIS:
While the previous table identifies specific sub-group performance relative to the overall student population, the Office of
Institutional Research also employed the “80% Rule” to examine subgroup performance relative to the highest performing
group in each category. Employing the 80% Rule, the following groups were identified as performing at less than 80% of the
highest performing group (in the case of unique student populations (i.e., Veterans, Foster Youth, DPS Students, and Low
Income), group performance was compared against the total student population) (NOTE: In most instances, insufficient data
existed to make comparisons between subgroups):



Hispanic or Latino: 9.3% ESL Basic Skills Completion Rate is 35.9% of the highest performing subgroup (Asian
students, 25.9%)
Female Students: 13.1% ESL Basic Skills Completion Rate is 78.4% of the highest performing subgroup (Male
Students, 16.7%)
Students 25 Years of Age or Older: 7.1% ESL Basic Skills Completion Rate is 16.7% of the highest performing
subgroup (Students 24 or Younger, 42.6%)
In addition to examining the 2014-15 ESL Basic Skills Completion Rate differences between subgroups and the total student
population, the Office of Institutional Research also examined three-year trend data (2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15) to determine
whether differences observed in the 2014-15 academic year represented increases/decreases in observed performance
outcome differences. Tables 13 through 16 depict observed three-year differences between subgroups and the total student
population related to race/ethnicity (table 13), gender (table 14), age range (table15), and disability status, foster youth status,
veterans status, and economically disadvantaged status (table 16) (NOTE: data is suppressed for subgroup populations with 10
or fewer cases).
SUMMARY – ESL BASIC SKILLS COURSE COMPLETION:
Examining differences in observed subgroup ESL Basic Skills Completion Rates relative to the general student population, by the
percentage gap methodology, by largest observed gaps, by 80% Rule that compares subgroups against the highest performing
subgroup, and over time (last 3-year data), subgroups that are most likely to experience disproportionate impact are:

Students 25 Years of Age or Older
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 34

Hispanic or Latino Students
Findings associated with ESL Basic Skills Completion Rates should be observed with caution. In most instances, insufficient data
exists to make comparisons between subgroups or to compare subgroup outcomes to the general student population. This is
true in the current year (2014-15) and in prior years examined (2012-13 and 2013-14).
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 35
District:
Chaffey College
College:
Chaffey College
GOALS, ACTIVITIES, FUNDING AND EVALUATION: ESL AND BASIC SKILLS COURSE COMPLETION
GOAL C.
The goal is to improve ESL and basic skills completion for the following target populations identified in the college research as experiencing a
disproportionate impact:
Target Population(s)
Example Group
Males - $
Students aged 20 or older-$
African Americans-$, #
Students with Disabilities-#
Students aged 50 or older-#
Hispanic/Latinos-%
Students aged 25 or older-%
Current gap, year
-7, 2014
-5.2, 2015
-7.9, 2015
-4.8, 2015
-12.5, 2015
-17.9, 2015
-4.7, 2015
-6.9, 2015
Goal*
No gap
-3.2
-5.0
-3.0
-10
-17
-3.0
-6.0
Goal Year
2020
2018
2018
2018
2017
2017
2018
2018
*Expressed as either a percentage or number
**Benchmark goals are to be decided by the institution.
$ - English Basic Skills Completion
# - Mathematics Basic Skills Completion
% - ESL Basic Skills Completion
ACTIVITIES: C. ESL AND BASIC SKILLS COURSE COMPLETION
C.1
• Activity Type(s)
X
Outreach
Student Services or other Categorical
Program
X
X
Student Equity Coordination/Planning
Curriculum/Course Development or
Adaptation
X
X
Instructional Support Activities
Direct Student Support
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 36
District:
X
Chaffey College
Research and Evaluation
College:
X
• Target Student Group(s) & # of Each Affected*:
ID
Target Group(s)
C.1
Males
African Americans
Students with Disabilities
Hispanics/Latinos
Students aged 25 or older
Students aged 50 or older
Chaffey College
Professional Development
# of Students Affected
1,468
810
191
140
1,345
79
• Activity Implementation Plan
Activity
*Activity
Type (see
above)
4, 5, 7
C.1 The college’s ESL and basic skills
faculty will increase student
participation in supplemental
instruction by coordinating with
faculty from the Success Centers and
Supplemental Instruction.
4; 5; 6
C.2 The college through the President’s
Equity Council and Human Resources
Department will analyze desirable
hiring qualifications to include
experience in teaching the targeted
group in basic skills.
4; 6
C.3 Basic skills faculty will
participate in paid training for all
contract and adjunct instructors in
Expected Outcome
Target
Date(s)
Responsible Parties
C.1.1 ESL and Basic skills
C.1.1: 2018
course completion will increase.
C.1.2 Increased movement
C.1.2: 2020
through ESL and basic skills
course sequences.
Dean, Mathematics and
Science; Dean, Language Arts;
Dean, Instructional Support
C.2.1 Increased representation of
disproportionately represented
faculty teaching ESL and basic
skills courses
Director Human Resources;
President’s Equity Council TriChairs
C.2.1 –2017
C.3.1 Increased engagement,
C.3.1 - 2017
success and persistence in ESL and
basic skills courses
Faculty Success Center
Coordinator; Director, Human
Resources
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 37
District:
Chaffey College
best practices for classroom equity.
C.4 The basic skills faculty will partner
with the college to develop mentor
programs for students most
disproportionately impacted.
C.5 The mathematics faculty will work
with the college to create a summer
bridge program in mathematics to
assist students with the transition to
college mathematics.
The college faculty will review its
curriculum and determine new ways
to use technology to assist students
with engaging in basic skills courses.
C.7 The mathematics faculty will work
with the college to embed Success
Center requirements into all math
courses below College Algebra.
C.8 The college’s English as a Second
Language faculty will partner with
the college to develop and provide
training workshops for non‐ESL
instructors for best practices in
teaching and assessing ESL students.
C.9 The ESL faculty will work with the
college’s English Department to
develop a Composition course
dedicated to ESL students.
C.6
College:
Chaffey College
4; 6; 8
C.4.1 – Measurable increase in the
number of culturally responsive
teaching and learning strategies
are used by faculty and staff
C.4.1 - 2018
Coordinator, Faculty Success
Center; Coordinators, Faculty
Advising Program; Director of
Special Populations
1; 2; 4; 8
C.5.1 – Increase in # of students
beginning their fall enrollment in
higher levels of math courses
C.5.1 – 2017
C.5.2 – Decrease in time for
students to move to transfer level
mathematics courses
C.6.1 – Faculty will introduce new
curriculum and methods of
teaching basic skills courses that
infuses technology.
C.5.2 – 2020
Dean, Counseling and Student
Support Success and Support
Programs; Dean, Mathematics
and Science; Director, Special
Populations
C.6.1 - 2016
VP, Student Services; Dean,
Mathematics and Science; Dean,
Language Arts; Director,
Disability Programs & Services
C.7.1: New directed learning
activities are introduced in
courses to be completed at the
Success Centers
C.8.1: A measurable
understanding by faculty of
ESL students needs
C.7.1 – 2017
Dean, Mathematics and
Science; Dean, Instructional
Support
C.8.1 -- 2016
Dean, Language Arts;
Coordinator, Faculty Success
Center; Dean, Institutional
Research
C.9.1: Increased completion of
transfer level English courses
by basic skills ESL students.
C.9.1 – 2018
Dean, Language Arts, Dean,
Institutional Research
3; 4; 5; 7
4; 5; 7
3; 4; 5; 6
4; 5; 6
KEY: 1) Outreach; 2) Student Services or other Categorical Program; 3) Research and Evaluation; 4) Student Equity Coordination/Planning; 5)
Curriculum/Course Development or Adaption; 6) Professional Development; 7) Instructional Support Activities; and 8) Direct Student Support. See
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 38
District:
Chaffey College
College:
Chaffey College
Student Equity Expenditure Guidelines for more information.
ID Planned Start and End Date(s)
C.1 Spring 2016 through Spring 2018
Student Equity Funds
$20,000
C.2
C.3
C.4
C.5
C.6
C.7
C.8
C.9
$20,000
$5,000
$2,000
$2,000
$60,000
$5,000
$5,000
$1,000
Spring 2016 through Fall 2016
Spring 2016 through Spring 2017
Fall 2015 – continuous
Spring 2016 through Summer 2017
Fall 2015 through Fall 2016
Fall 2015 through Spring 2017
Spring 2016 through Fall 2016
Spring 2016 through Spring 2018
Other Funds**
General Fund - $102,000, AEBG $50,000
General Fund - $18,000
AEBG - $5,000
General Fund - $102,000
BSI – $70,000
Basic Skills Initiative - $10,000
Basic Skills Initiative - $10,000
General Fund - $5,000
• Link to Goal
ID Link to Goal
C.1 Adding or increasing supplemental instruction to basic skills courses across the college should improve completion.
C.2 Hiring faculty who overtly understand the nature of working with community college students and their needs and
limitations, particularly in the basic skills area will provide greater understanding and engagement with those students,
increasing their likelihood of success.
C.3 Institutionalizing an understanding of best practices for achieving classroom equity requires new, innovative and ongoing
training of faculty.
C.4 Engaging with students, particularly through the faculty advising program, provides students a deeper level of engagement
and connection and assists them in determining to persist.
C.5 Summer bridge programs, new to the college, have shown to assist students in accelerating the math completion.
C.6 Curriculum review and transformation allows faculty to teach in a way and with tools students understand.
C.7 Requiring students to engage in Success Center activities accentuates the need for repetitive skills use in math, which leads
to a greater chance of persistence and completion.
C.8 Institutionalizing an understanding of best practices for working with ESL students and developing understandings of their
backgrounds leads to greater engagement and connections that creates a sense of belonging in continuing.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 39
District:
Chaffey College
College:
Chaffey College
C.9 Reducing the number of ESL courses required to demonstrated English proficiency provides a greater chance of completion
of the basic skills sequence.
• Evaluation
For each activity associated with Student Equity Indicator #3 (ESL and Basic Skills Completion), Chaffey College has identified data collection
timelines and measurable metrics that directly relate to and assess expected outcomes:
 Activity C.1: Utilizing the District’s Success Center tracking system (which is also used to record contacts with Supplemental Instruction (SI) leaders),
the OIR will identify students enrolled in non-credit and pre-collegiate level ESL and Basic Skills courses who access Success Centers/SI. Course data
(reported through MIS) and Success Center/SI contact data are updated at the end of each semester. As students who access Success Centers/SI
progress through Chaffey College, the District will utilize Student Success Scorecard Basic Skills Improvement data downloaded from Data on
Demand to determine whether a higher percentage of students exposed to Success Center/SI support subsequently progress through ESL and Basic
Skills course sequences.
 Activity C.2: The Chaffey College Office of Institutional Research (OIR) will examine MIS course (CB), section (XB), and enrollment (SX) data and
merge this information against employee data (EB and EJ) to determine whether the representation of historically underrepresented faculty
teaching ESL and Basic Skills courses increases over time. Comparisons will be made within department and relative to overall faculty demographic
characteristics. Data files are reported annually (usually in September/October), allowing for on-going systemic longitudinal analyses.
 Activity C.3: Utilizing MIS course (CB), section (XB), enrollment (SX) data, and Student Basic (SB) data elements, the OIR will examine disaggregated
success, retention, and persistence rates for students enrolled in ESL and Basic Skills courses. Utilizing validate instruments that measure
engagement, hope, growth mindset, and other non-cognitive factors, the OIR will also periodically administer pre/post surveys to students enrolled
in ESL and Basic Skills courses to determine whether student engagement and non-cognitive growth increased over the breadth of the semester.
 Activity C.4: Working with Chaffey’s Faculty Success Center, the OIR will identify the number of full-time and adjunct faculty who participated in
Faculty Success Center training activities designed to promote culturally responsive teaching and learning strategies. Faculty will be surveyed
annually to determine the extent to which activities were embedded within instructional practices.
 Activity C.5.1: The OIR will work with the Mathematics Department to identify students who participated in the Summer Bridge Program. After
participation in the Summer Bridge Program, students will be assessed using the District’s standardized assessment testing process to determine
their mathematics course placement recommendation level. Mathematics course placement recommendation levels of Summer Bridge Program
participants will be compared against first-time, no-prior-college-experience students who did not participate in the Summer Bridge Program to
determine whether measurable differences in Mathematics course placement recommendations exist. Research will occur annually.
 Activity C.5.2: Consistent with past tracking studies conducted at Chaffey College, the OIR will examine first-time, no-prior-college experience
student progression through the Mathematics course sequence. Sequential course progression will be disaggregated by student demographic
characteristics and by Student Equity Plan activities (e.g., Summer Bridge Program) that students participate in. Research will be generated annually.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 40
District:
Chaffey College
College:
Chaffey College
 Activity C.6: After Chaffey College Mathematics Department faculty identify changes in curriculum, the OIR will examine success and retention rates
prior to/after changes went into effect and will survey students to determine perceived effectiveness of technology-infused instruction. Surveying
will occur after instructional changes are implemented.
 Activity C.7: Consistent with current Success Center practices, the OIR will survey students who participate in Mathematics directed learning
activities (DLAs) to determine the efficacy of DLAs. The OIR will also utilize the Success Center tracking system to determine types of Success Center
activities students are engaged in, time invested in these activities, and their relationship to Mathematics course success and retention rates.
Research will occur annually, surveying occurs each semester.
 Activity C.8: Consistent with current Faculty Success Center evaluation practices, faculty who participate in training sessions designed to develop
best practices in teaching and assessing ESL students will complete pre/post workshop assessment surveys. Pre/post workshop assessment will
provide feedback to English as a Second Language faculty and other workshop leaders about non-ESL faculty acquisition of knowledge, skills, and
abilities related to ESL student needs. Surveying will occur prior to/after each training session; aggregate outcomes will be reported annually.
 Activity C.9: In tandem with the evaluation for Activity C.5, the OIR will examine first-time, no-prior-college experience student progression through
the English course sequence, examining progression through both English pre-collegiate and ESL course pathways into transfer-level English.
Sequential course progression will be disaggregated by student demographic characteristics and by Student Equity Plan activities. Research will be
conducted annually.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 41
District:
Chaffey College
College:
Chaffey College
Success Indicator: Degree and
Certificate Completion
CAMPUS-BASED RESEARCH: DEGREE AND CERTIFICATE COMPLETION
D. DEGREE AND CERTIFICATE COMPLETION. The ratio of the number of students by
population group who receive a degree or certificate to the number of students in that
group with the same informed matriculation goal as documented in the student educational
plan developed with a counselor/advisor. Calculate degree and certificate completion rates
by dividing:
DEGREE AND CERTIFICATE COMPLETION (COMBINED):
Target Population(s)
All Students
American Indian /
Alaskan Native
Asian
Black or African American
Hispanic or Latino
Native Hawaiian or
Other Pacific Islander
White
Some other race
More than one race
The # of firsttime students
who enrolled
in the base
year with the
goal of
obtaining a
degree or
certificate
3,402
The number of
students out of
 (the
denominator)
who earned a
degree or
certificate
within one or
more years.
623
The Rate of
Degree and
Certificate
Completion
Total (all
student
average)
Degree and
Certificate
Completion
Rate*
Comparison to
the all student
average
(Percentage
point
difference
with +/added)**
18.6%
19
6
31.6%
18.6%
Insufficient Data
195
350
1,765
50
49
315
25.6%
14.0%
17.8%
18.6%
18.6%
18.6%
+ 7.0%
- 4.6%
- 0.8%
14
3
21.4%
18.6%
Insufficient Data
806
253
n/a
163
47
n/a
20.2%
18.6%
n/a
18.6%
18.6%
18.6%
+ 1.6%
0.0%
n/a
Males
Females
Unknown Gender
1,409
1,935
58
229
394
10
16.3%
20.4%
17.2%
18.6%
18.6%
18.6%
- 2.3%
1.8%
- 1.4%
19 or Younger
20 to 24 Years of Age
25 to 29 Years of Age
30 to 34 Years of Age
35 to 39 Years of Age
40 to 49 Years of Age
50 or Older
2,783
325
115
41
42
72
24
524
46
21
5
8
24
5
18.8%
14.2%
18.3%
12.2%
19.0%
33.3%
20.8%
18.6%
18.6%
18.6%
18.6%
18.6%
18.6%
18.6%
+ 0.2%
- 4.4%
- 0.3%
- 6.4%
+ 0.4%
+ 14.7%
Insufficient Data
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 42
District:
Chaffey College
Current or Former Foster
Youth
Individuals with
Disabilities
Low-Income Students
Veterans
College:
4
0
0.0%
172
30
17.4%
2,521
40
511
9
20.3%
22.5%
Chaffey College
18.6%
Insufficient Data
18.6%
- 1.2%
18.6%
18.6%
+ 1.7%
+ 3.9%
*The all student average is proposed as the comparison point for all groups. Therefore, this rate would be written in all of the
orange boxes and used to calculate the equity gap for each group (the last column on the right).
**Calculated by subtracting the average Degree and Certificate Completion Rate from the each subgroup’s Degree and
Certificate Completion Rate.
According to this methodology, a ‘-3 percentage point gap or greater’ is evidence of a disproportionate impact. Though this,
much like the 80% rule, is an arbitrary designation, it serves as a reasonable strategy for identifying unequal outcomes that
would benefit from further discussion. In the table above, cells are highlighted where a -3 or greater percentage gap is
identified.
Any discussion about disproportionate impact should also consider the number of students impacted. Chaffey may want to
consider prioritizing a smaller percentage point gap that is calculated for a student group with more than 100 students over a
larger percentage point equity gap calculated for a student group with fewer than 10 students. This is because rates calculated
using smaller numbers will be subject to greater variability and it may make sense to prioritize a gap that impacts a greater
number of students.
Which three student groups are experiencing the greatest gaps – and how large are these gaps (in percentage
points)?



Students 30 to 34 Years of Age: 6.4% gap between the Degree and Certificate Completion Rate of this group (12.2%)
and the total student population (18.6%)
Black or African American Students: 4.6% gap between the Degree and Certificate Completion Rate of this group
(14.0%) and the total student population (18.6%)
Students 20 to 24 Years of Age: 4.4% gap between the Degree and Certificate Completion Rate of this group (14.2%)
and the total student population (18.6%)
For these three student groups (as applicable) calculate the number of students ‘lost’, which is also the number of
students who, if they had earned an award, would have closed the equity gap:
1
2
3
4
Percentage
Expressed as
Decimal
Multiply
The # of first-time
students who
enrolled in 2008-09
and named
certificates and
degrees as their
matriculation goal
=
Number of
Students
“Lost”
Equity
Gap
Student Group
Gap in
Comparison to
the Average,
Expressed as
Percentage
Largest
Gap
Students 30 to 34
Years of Age
6.4%
.064
x
41
=
3
Second
Largest
Black or African
American
4.6%
.046
x
350
=
16
Third
Largest
Students 20 to 24
Years of Age
4.4%
.044
x
325
=
14
80% RULE ANALYSIS:
While the previous table identifies specific sub-group performance relative to the overall student population, the Office of
Institutional Research also employed the “80% Rule” to examine subgroup performance relative to the highest performing
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 43
group in each category. Employing the 80% Rule, the following groups were identified as performing at less than 80% of the
highest performing group (in the case of unique student populations (i.e., Veterans, Foster Youth, DPS Students, and Low
Income), group performance was compared against the total student population):





Black or African American: 14.0% Degree and Certificate Completion Rate is 54.7% of the highest performing
subgroup (Asian students, 25.6%)
Hispanic or Latino: 17.8% Degree and Certificate Completion Rate is 69.5% of the highest performing subgroup
(Asian students, 25.6%)
Other Race: 18.6% Degree and Certificate Completion Rate is 72.7% of the highest performing subgroup (Asian
students, 25.6%)
White: 20.2% Degree and Certificate Completion Rate is 78.9% of the highest performing subgroup (Asian students,
25.6%)
Students 20 to 34 Years of Age: 15.0% Degree and Certificate Completion Rate is 56.0% of the highest performing
subgroup (Students 35 or Older, 26.8%)
In addition to examining the 2014-15 Degree and Certificate Completion Rate differences between subgroups and the total
student population, the Office of Institutional Research also examined three-year trend data (2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15) to
determine whether differences observed in the 2014-15 academic year represented increases/decreases in observed
performance outcome differences. Tables 17 through 20 depict observed three-year differences between subgroups and the
total student population related to race/ethnicity (table 17), gender (table 18), age range (table 19), and disability status, foster
youth status, veterans status, and economically disadvantaged status (table 20) (NOTE: data is suppressed for subgroup
populations with 10 or fewer cases).
SUMMARY – DEGREE AND CERTIFICATE COMPLETION (COMBINED):
Examining differences in observed subgroup Degree and Certificate Completion Rates relative to the general student
population, by the percentage gap methodology, by largest observed gaps, by 80% Rule that compares subgroups against the
highest performing subgroup, and over time (last 3-year data), subgroups that are most likely to experience disproportionate
impact are:


Students 20 to 34 Years of Age
Black or African American Students
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 44
District:
Chaffey College
College:
Chaffey College
GOALS, ACTIVITIES, FUNDING AND EVALUATION: DEGREE AND CERTIFICATE COMPLETION
GOAL D.
The goal is to improve degree and certificate completion for the following target populations identified in the college research as experiencing a
disproportionate impact:
Target Population(s)
Current gap, year
Example Group
-4, 2014
Students 30-34 Years
6.4% gap, 2015
of Age
Black or African
4.6% gap, 2015
American Students
Students 20-24 Years
4.4% gap, 2015
of Age
*Expressed as either a percentage or number
**Benchmark goals are to be decided by the institution.
Goal*
No gap
+2.2% each year
over next 3 years
+2% each year over
next 3 years
+2% each year over
next 3 years
Goal Year
2020
2018
2018
2018
ACTIVITIES: D. DEGREE AND CERTIFICATE COMPLETION
• Target Student Group(s) & # of Each Affected*:
ID
Target Group(s)
D.1 – D.6
Students 30-34 Years of Age
D.1 – D.6
Black or African American Students
D.1 – D.6
Students 20-24 Years of Age
D.1 – D.6
Veterans
# of Students Affected
41 @ 100%
350 @ 100%
325 @ 100%
40 @ 100%
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 45
District:
Chaffey College
College:
Chaffey College
• Activity Implementation Plan
Activities for Degree and Certificate Completion focus on 6 primary activities. The following provides background on each approach/activity:
Activity
D.1 Create a task force to identify,
implement and explore scaling of
evidence based programs designed
to increase service to traditionally
underserved/underrepresented
populations (e.g., African American,
Latino, and AB540, LGBTQ, Foster
Youth Students).
D.2 Continue to scale and support
foundational skills development
(Math and English) and use of
learning communities (e.g.,
MathsWay, Fast Track; STEM,
Bridge, and others)
D.3 Develop a robust mentor program
(e.g., peer, alumni, staff and faculty)
and Scale existing Faculty Advising
Program.
D.4 Develop ongoing Professional
Learning Opportunities (PLOs) for
faculty, classified staff,
*Activity Type
(see above)
2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8
Expected Outcome
Target Date(s)
D.1.1 A plan is completed that D.1.1 – Spring
outlines which programs will
2016
be implemented/scaled
Responsible Parties
VP, Student Services; Dean,
Institutional Research and
Resource Development;
Presidents Equity Council;
Dean, Counseling
D.1.2 Selected programs are
piloted or scaled and
evaluated (e.g., Puente,
UMOJA, AMAN/AWOMAN,
2+2+3 BAT, EOPS, student
clubs and multicultural
curriculum)
D.2.1 Equity gaps among
students who are African
American/Black and Latino
will shrink by 2% each year
D.1.2 – Fall
2017
D.2.1 –2018
Dean, Mathematics and
Science; Dean, Language Arts
1; 2; 4; 6; 7; 8
D.3.1 Increased engagement
in mentor programs
D.3.1 - 2017
4; 6;
D.4.1 – increased
communication between
faculty, classified staff,
D.4.1 - 2016
VP, Student Services; Executive
Director Foundation &
Government Relations;
Director Alumni Relations
VP, Student Services; Dean,
Instructional Support and
Library Learning Resources;
1; 2; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 46
District:
Chaffey College
College:
administrators and students
exploring culturally responsive
teaching and learning methods (e.g.,
Hope and Growth Mindset, building
culturally responsive learning
communities, holistic and integrated
learning, cross-cultural
communications.
Chaffey College
administrators, and students
about effective practices that
resonate with students
D.5 College Career and Transfer Centers
will be utilized to engage and assist
students in developing career and
transfer goals.
2; 4; 8
D.6 Collect and analyze data on students
who participated in one or more
Equity Plan Degree and/or
Certificate Activity
3
D.4.2 – Measurable increase
in the number of culturally
responsive teaching and
learning strategies are used
by faculty and staff
D.5.1 – Increase in # of
students with clearly defined
career and/or transfer goals.
D.5.2 – Increase in # of
students achieving degree
and/or certificate completion
D.6.1 – A report is generated
and used to inform future
interventions and service to
designated populations
Faculty Success Center
Facilitator; Classified Success
Network Advisory Committee
D.5.1 - 2017
Dean, Counseling and Student
Support Success and Support
Programs; Director, Transfer
and Career Centers
D.6.1 - 2018
VP, Student Services; Dean,
Institutional Research and
Resource Development;
Presidents Equity Council
KEY: 1) Outreach; 2) Student Services or other Categorical Program; 3) Research and Evaluation; 4) Student Equity Coordination/Planning; 5)
Curriculum/Course Development or Adaption; 6) Professional Development; 7) Instructional Support Activities; and 8) Direct Student Support. See Student
Equity Expenditure Guidelines for more information.
ID
D.1
D.2
D.3
D.4
Planned Start and End Date(s)
Spring 2016 – Fall 2017
Fall 2015 – Spring 2018
Spring 2016 – Spring 2017
Fall 2015 – Fall 2016
Student Equity Funds
0
$50,000
$70,000
$20,000
Other Funds**
0
General Fund - $104,000
General Fund - $104,000
General Fund - $50,000
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 47
District:
Chaffey College
D.5 Fall 2015 – Spring 2017
D.6 Fall 2015 – ongoing
College:
$30,000
0
Chaffey College
General Fund - $170,000
General Fund - $120,000
• Link to Goal
ID Link to Goal
D.1 A critical component of the overall equity plan is the inclusion of a formal task force. This task force will consist of faculty,
staff and administrators with diverse backgrounds. The task force will meet a minimum of quarterly, or more frequently if
needed. Responsibilities of this committee includes, but not limited to: 1) Serve as experts in respective specialties; 2)
identify, implement and explore scaling of evidence based programs designed to increase service to traditionally
underserved/underrepresented populations; 3) Monitor project progress toward stated goals and objectives; 4) Review
reports/evaluation data and provide recommended programmatic adjustments, as needed; 5) Ensure that expenditures are
documented in a manner which will satisfy federal, state and college policies and regulations; and 6) Facilitate strong
communication and assist in appropriate dissemination of information concerning Equity Activities, accomplishments and
opportunities across the College and other appropriate sources.
D.2 The Equity Plan and "Basic Skills" initiative activities are inextricably linked. Ensuring the success of historically underrepresented students is the primary goal for both Equity and BSI initiatives at Chaffey. Specifically, the Faculty Success
Center has a strong equity focus, and the last two Summer Institutes focused on equity-related issues have elevated those
conversations to the forefront. Additionally, the college has engaged in a partnership with M2C3 to do surveys and focus
groups with students, as well as focus groups with faculty, administrators and staff. These findings are the centerpiece or
inspiration for a number of training activities that are jointly funded by Equity and BSI. Specifically, the efforts in math and
English toward acceleration (Fast Track) and redesign target Chaffey's most vulnerable students. For instance, internal
research demonstrated that young male students of color were more likely to repeat a math course. As a result, the Math
Success Center redesigned some offerings in the Center, and before the student can repeat a math course for a third time,
they are required to engage in help seeking behavior to assist them in reformulating their approach to learning in
mathematics. That innovation has resulted in a reduction in third time math repeats by 30%. Chaffey has expanded a
number of efforts that had their roots in Basic Skills funding. The most notable include Fast Track, the reading/English
integration, and the Faculty Success Center. Fast Track began as a Faculty Inquiry Team project in 2011. As a result of the
research and local dialog about acceleration, in 2011 the college initiated 50 accelerated sections, primarily in math and
English. As a result of the data collected from that experiment, students experienced such an increase in success and
motivation that the college has slowly scaled offerings in Fast Track to approximately 200 sections at all three campuses.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 48
District:
Chaffey College
College:
Chaffey College
D.3 The college’s Faculty Advising model, as well as its hosting of summits for men of color have increase the individual
connection for students to faculty and staff and have provided students with opportunities to see themselves as successful
in the future.
D.4 Ongoing professional development is vital for equipping faculty and leadership with the research based knowledge
necessary to design effective courses and support structures, as well as implementing effective active learning and explicit
teaching strategies across content areas. To this end, the Equity Plan PLO component is designed to create a sustained
learning environment in which collaboration, instructional refinement, practice, and reflection can occur. Professional
Learning Opportunities include: Local, State and National Conferences Opportunities - Conference attendance
opportunities will be made available to promote innovation in teaching and learning. Selected PLO conferences will be
highly interactive, action-driven experiences that build individual and collective understanding of effective solutions to help
meet the specific needs of Chaffey students. Potential conferences may include HACU National Conference, A2Mend
Conference, Black, Brown and College Bound, Achieving the Dream. Conference attendance will include faculty, staff and
students and whenever possible will be in California, but may be out of state as necessary.
D.5 Equity resources will be utilized to scale other non-instructional and student support services that provide one-on-one
contact with students and help inform their educational planning. Multiple resources will be created through the Career
and Transfer Centers to provide data and information on career exploration and transfer opportunities, respectively.
Career Center personnel will work one-on-one with students to assess career interest, provide information on labor market
projections, employment opportunities, and knowledge, skills, and abilities required in occupations of interest. Transfer
Center personnel will work one-on-one with students to identify possible four-year destination institutions that offer
programs of study that align with current and prospective student educational goals and interests. The Transfer Center will
also arrange one-on-one appointments with representatives from various four-year institutions and trips to select four-year
institutions. Financial literacy counseling will also be offered.
• Evaluation
For each activity associated with Student Equity Indicator #4 (ESL and Basic Skills Completion), Chaffey College has identified data collection
timelines and measurable metrics that directly relate to and assess expected outcomes:
 Activity D.1.1: Research identifying evidence-based practices will be generated in order to facilitate task force decisions about scalability. The OIR
will work directly with the task force to determine the scope and breadth of the studies and how proposed studies facilitate informed decisionmaking. Studies will be generated on an as-needed basis.
 Activity D.1.2: Research and evaluation components designed to assess the efficacy of scaled programs will inculcate pertinent Student Equity Plan
indicators (e.g., course completion; basic skills completion; degree and certificate completion; transfer) that are relevant to the identified activities
and student subpopulations impacted. Research designs will be determined in the 2016-17 academic year and initiated in Fall 2017.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 49
District:
Chaffey College
College:
Chaffey College
 Activity D.2: Utilizing MIS course (CB), section (XB), enrollment (SX) data, and Student Basic (SB) data elements, the OIR will examine disaggregated
success, retention, and persistence rates by student demographic characteristics. As part of annual Student Equity Plan Indicator updates, degree
and certificate completion rates for African American and Hispanic students will be examined to determine whether annual target goals are being
achieved.
 Activity D.3: As part of the District’s expansion of Faculty Advising, the OIR will identify the number of faculty who annually participate in student
advising. The District is currently exploring various student retention and data collection systems that allow data collection to occur at diverse
locations (e.g., identified meeting places, faculty offices, etc.). Students who participate in faculty advising will also be identified. Number of
students and faculty engaging in faculty advising will be documented and reported annually.
 Activity D.4.1 and D.4.2: Working with Chaffey’s Faculty Success Center, the OIR will identify the number of full-time and adjunct faculty who
participated in Faculty Success Center training activities designed to promote culturally responsive teaching and learning strategies. The OIR will also
work with the Office Professional Development to identify classified professionals who participate in Classified Success Network training
opportunities that incorporate culturally responsive practices. Faculty will be surveyed annually to determine the extent to which activities were
embedded within instructional practices. Classified professionals who participate in Classified Success Network activities will be surveyed
immediately following their participation in training activities to ascertain the culturally responsive knowledge, skills, and abilities they acquired as a
result of exposure to training.
 Activity D.5.1: Working with the Office of Counseling and Matriculation, the OIR will identify students who file abbreviated and comprehensive
educational plans. OIR staff will work with Counseling and Matriculation staff and Office of Information Technology and Services (ITS) staff to ensure
that MIS data element SS01 (Student Educational Goal) is accurately populated. An a semesterly basis, OIR staff will examine SS01 by student
demographic characteristics to determine whether more students are reporting career/transfer educational goals and whether observed changes
are proportionate to the Chaffey College student population.
 Activity D.5.2: Utilizing MIS Student Program Award (SP) data that is available annually in September/October and locally-approved certificates that
are recorded in Colleague, the OIR will annually identify the number of students who were awarded degrees or certificates in the prior academic
year. Award data will be disaggregated by student demographic characteristics to determine whether an increase in degrees/certificates conferred
has occurred and whether awards conferred are representative of the Chaffey College student population.
 Activity D.6: In addition to updating Student Equity Indicators annually, the OIR will provided a comprehensive report that provides an overview of
all research related to specific Student Equity Plan activities. Evidence about the efficacy of proposed Student Equity Plan activities will inform
decision-makers; highlights from the report will be shared with the District’s Governing Board.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 50
Success Indicator: Transfer
TRANSFER
E. TRANSFER. The ratio of the number of students by population group who complete a
minimum of 12 units and have attempted a transfer level course in mathematics or English,
to the number of students in that group who actually transfer after one or more (up to six)
years. Calculate transfer rates by dividing:
TRANSFERRED
Target Population(s)
All Students
American Indian /
Alaskan Native
Asian
Black or African American
Hispanic or Latino
Native Hawaiian or
Other Pacific Islander
White
Some other race
More than one race
Males
Females
Unknown Gender
The # of students
who complete a
minimum of 6
units and have
attempted a
transfer level
course in
mathematics or
English.
3,402
The number of
students out of
 (the
denominator)
who transferred
after one or
more (up to six) The Transfer
years.
Rate
1,021
30.0%
Total (all
student
average)
Transfer
Rate*
Comparison to
the all student
average
(Percentage
point
difference
with +/added)**
Insufficient Data
19
6
31.6%
30.0%
195
350
1,765
79
109
454
40.5%
31.1%
25.7%
30.0%
30.0%
30.0%
14
2
14.3%
30.0%
Insufficient Data
806
253
n/a
270
101
n/a
33.5%
39.9%
n/a
30.0%
30.0%
30.0%
+ 3.5%
+ 9.9%
n/a
1,409
1,935
58
418
578
25
29.7%
29.9%
43.1%
30.0%
30.0%
30.0%
- 0.3%
- 0.1%
+ 13.1%
+ 10.5%
+ 1.1%
- 4.3%
19 or Younger
2,783
916
32.9%
30.0%
+ 2.9%
20 to 24 Years of Age
325
62
19.1%
30.0%
- 10.9%
25 to 29 Years of Age
115
22
19.1%
30.0%
- 10.9%
30 to 34 Years of Age
41
3
7.3%
30.0%
- 22.7%
35 to 39 Years of Age
42
6
14.3%
30.0%
- 15.7%
40 to 49 Years of Age
72
10
13.9%
30.0%
- 16.1%
50 or Older
24
2
8.3%
30.0%
- 21.7%
Current or Former Foster Youth
4
2
50.0%
30.0%
Insufficient Data
Individuals with Disabilities
172
27
15.7%
30.0%
- 14.3%
Low-Income Students
2,521
305
34.6%
30.0%
+ 4.6%
Veterans
40
12
30.0%
30.0%
0.0%
*The all student average is proposed as the comparison point for all groups. Therefore, this rate would be written in all of the
orange boxes and used to calculate the equity gap for each group (the last column on the right).
**Calculated by subtracting the average Transfer Prepared Rate from the each subgroup’s Transfer Prepared Rate.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 51
According to this methodology, a ‘-3 percentage point gap or greater’ is evidence of a disproportionate impact. Though this,
much like the 80% rule, is an arbitrary designation, it serves as a reasonable strategy for identifying unequal outcomes that
would benefit from further discussion. In the table above, cells are highlighted where a -3 or greater percentage gap is
identified.
Any discussion about disproportionate impact should also consider the number of students impacted. Chaffey may want to
consider prioritizing a smaller percentage point gap that is calculated for a student group with more than 100 students over a
larger percentage point equity gap calculated for a student group with fewer than 10 students. This is because rates calculated
using smaller numbers will be subject to greater variability and it may make sense to prioritize a gap that impacts a greater
number of students.
Which three student groups are experiencing the greatest gaps – and how large are these gaps (in percentage
points)?



Students With Disabilities: 14.3% gap between the Transfer Rate of this group (15.7%) and the total student
population (30.0%)
Students 20 Years of Age or Older: 13.0% gap between the Degree and Certificate Completion Rate of this group
(17.0%) and the total student population (30.0%)
Hispanic or Latino Students: 4.3% gap between the Transfer Rate of this group (25.7%) and the total student
population (30.0%)
For these three student groups (as applicable) calculate the number of students ‘lost’, which is also the number of
students who, if they had succeeded, would have closed the equity gap:
1
3
2
4
Multiply
The # of first-time
students who
enrolled in 2008-09
and named
certificates and
degrees as their
matriculation goal
=
Number of
Students
“Lost”
Equity
Gap
Student Group
Gap in
comparison to
the Average,
Expressed as
Percentage
Largest
Gap
Students With
Disabilities
14.3%
.143
x
172
=
25
Second
Largest
Students 20 Years
of Age or Older
13.0%
.130
x
619
=
81
Third
Largest
Hispanic or Latino
Students
4.3%
.043
x
1,765
=
76
Percentage
expressed as
decimal
80% RULE ANALYSIS:
While the previous table identifies specific sub-group performance relative to the overall student population, the Office of
Institutional Research also employed the “80% Rule” to examine subgroup performance relative to the highest performing
group in each category. Employing the 80% Rule, the following groups were identified as performing at less than 80% of the
highest performing group (in the case of unique student populations (i.e., Veterans, Foster Youth, DPS Students, and Low
Income), group performance was compared against the total student population):




Hispanic or Latino: 25.7% Transfer Rate is 63.5% of the highest performing subgroup (Asian students, 40.5%)
Black or African American: 31.1% Transfer Rate is 76.8% of the highest performing subgroup (Asian students, 40.5%)
Students 20 Years of Age or Older: 17.0% Transfer Rate is 51.7% of the highest performing subgroup (Students 19 or
Older, 32.9%)
Students With Disabilities: 15.7% Transfer Rate is 52.3% of the total student population (30.0%)
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 52
District:
College:
In addition to examining the 2014-15 Transfer Rate differences between subgroups and the total student population, the Office
of Institutional Research also examined three-year trend data (2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15) to determine whether differences
observed in the 2014-15 academic year represented increases/decreases in observed performance outcome differences.
Tables 33 through 36 depict observed three-year differences between subgroups and the total student population related to
race/ethnicity (table 33), gender (table 34), age range (table 35), and disability status, foster youth status, veterans status, and
economically disadvantaged status (table 36) (NOTE: data is suppressed for subgroup populations with 10 or fewer cases).
SUMMARY – TRANSFER RATE:
Examining differences in observed subgroup Transfer Rates relative to the general student population, by the percentage gap
methodology, by largest observed gaps, by 80% Rule that compares subgroups against the highest performing subgroup, and
over time (last 3-year data), subgroups that are most likely to experience disproportionate impact are:



Students With Disabilities
Students 20 Years of Age or Older
Hispanic or Latino Students
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 53
GOALS, ACTIVITIES, FUNDING AND EVALUATION: TRANSFER
GOAL E.
The goal is to improve transfer for the following target populations identified in the college research as experiencing a
disproportionate impact:
Target Population(s)
Current gap, year
Example Group
-4, 2014
Hispanic
-4.3, 2015
African American
-5.0, 2015
Students with Disabilities -2.3, 2015
Students 20 years of older -13.9, 2015
Foster Youth
Insufficient Data
*Expressed as either a percentage or number
**Benchmark goals are to be decided by the institution.
Goal*
No gap
-2.0
-3.0
-1.3
-10
Goal Year
2020
2018
2018
2018
2020
In addition to the identified target populations, current and former youth are also a target population. The data from the population
as too small in comparison to the other groups, however we know that this is one of the most vulnerable groups of students in terms
of completion and transfer. Extra efforts will be used to attend to this population.
ACTIVITIES: E. TRANSFER
E.1
• Activity Type(s)
X
X
X
Outreach
Student Services or other
Categorical Program
Research and Evaluation
X
X
Student Equity Coordination/Planning
Curriculum/Course Development or
Adaptation
Professional Development
X
Instructional Support Activities
Direct Student Support
• Target Student Group(s) & # of Each Affected*:
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 54
District:
ID
E.1
Chaffey College
College:
Target Group(s)
Hispanic
African American
Students with Disabilities
Students aged 20 or older
Foster Youth
• Activity Implementation Plan
Activity
E.1 The college will actively pursue
new opportunities to create
transfer articulation agreements
with public and private colleges
and universities, including UCs,
CSUs, and HBCUs outside of those
currently with the Chancellor’s
Office.
E.2 The college will actively recruit
underrepresented students in to
the 2+2+3 legal program.
E.3 The college will increase
access to four-year transfer
institutions through increased,
coordinated, on-campus visits
to UCs, CSUs and Independent
colleges and universities.
Chaffey College
# of Students Affected
1,765
350
172
619
155
*Activity
Type (see
above)
1, 2, 3, 4, 8
1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8
4, 8
Expected Outcome
Target
Date(s)
Responsible Parties
E.1.1 The number of
articulations with four-year
colleges and universities will
increase by 10%.
E.1.1: 2017
Vice President, Student
Services; Director,
Transfer & Career Center
E.2.1 The number of
students formally
transferring from the
program into the University
of California system will
increase by 20%.
E.3.1 The number of college
visits will increase by 10%.
E.2.1 –2018
Director, Transfer &
Career Centers; Director,
Legal Studies 2+2+3
Program
E.3.1 – 2017
Director, Transfer &
Career Center; Dean,
Counseling
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 55
District:
Chaffey College
E.4 Underrepresented students,
including those from
AMAN/AWOMAN, Puente, EOPS,
CalWorks and foster youth will be
targeted for transfer activities and
college visits.
ID
E.1
E.2
E.3
E.4
Planned Start and End Date(s)
Fall 2015 – Fall 2017
Summer 2016 – Summer 2018
Fall 2015 – Spring 2017
Spring 2016 – Spring 2018
College:
1, 2, 3, 4, 8
Chaffey College
E.4.1 – Measurable increase
in the number of
underrepresented students
visiting and applying for
transfer to four-year
universities.
Student Equity Funds
$38,000
$140,000
$4,500
$4,500
E.4.1 - 2018
Director, Transfer &
Career Centers; Director,
Legal Studies 2+2+3
Program; Director, Special
Populations & Student
Equity; Dean, Counseling
Other Funds**
General Fund - $168,000
General Fund - $60,000; SSSP - $10,000
General Fund - $168,000
General Fund - $168,000
• Link to Goal
ID Link to Goal
E.1 Increasing student’s choices and options for transferring to four-year colleges and universities increases their likelihood of
finding a transfer institution that is the best fit.
E.2 This program is designed to provide underrepresented students with guaranteed admissions to select UC law schools.
Through this program, the ability to increase the students not only transferring, but also attending graduate school
increases.
E.3 The more students visit and see other institutions, the more likely they are to find one that is a fit and increase their desire to
transfer.
E.4 Creating pathways for underrepresented students to see various institutions increases their likelihood of feeling like they
can transfer.
• Evaluation
For each activity associated with Student Equity Indicator #5 (Transfer), Chaffey College has identified data collection timelines
and measurable metrics that directly relate to and assess expected outcomes:
 Activity E.1: Working with the Transfer Center, Chaffey College Leadership Team, and other key constituency groups, the OIR will
use the 2015-16 academic year as a baseline to identify the current number of articulation agreements with four-year colleges and
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 56
District:
Chaffey College
College:
Chaffey College
universities. At the end of each academic year (approx. July), the OIR will work with these groups to identify new articulation
agreements established within the past year in order to determine progress on this measure.
 Activity E.2: Working with the 2+2+3 Program Coordinator, Transfer Center, Chaffey College Leadership Team, and other key
constituency groups, the OIR will identify participants in the 2+2+3 Legal Program. Program participants will be tracked through
existing data sources (e.g., National Student Clearinghouse (NSC), UC transfer data, etc.) to determine transfer rate of program
participants to participating UC and private four-year institutions. Disaggregated data will be analyzed annually.
 Activity E.3: Working with the Transfer Center, the OIR will use the 2015-16 academic year as a baseline to identify the current
number of visits coordinated through the Transfer Center to four-year colleges and universities. At the end of each academic year
(approx. July), the OIR will work with Transfer Center personnel to identify number of visits to four-year colleges and universities
within the past year to determine progress on this measure. Students will also be surveyed in order to obtain feedback about
satisfaction with and strengths/weaknesses of the visitation program.
 Activity E.4: Working with the Transfer Center, the OIR will use the 2015-16 academic year as a baseline to identify the number of
students who: a) visit; b) apply; and c) transfer to four-year colleges and universities. At the end of each academic year (approx.
July), the OIR will work with Transfer Center and utilize existing data sources to identify progress on these three measures.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 57
Other College- or District-wide Initiatives
Affecting Several Indicators
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 58
GOALS, ACTIVITIES, FUNDING AND EVALUATION: AFFECTING SEVERAL INDICATORS
ACTIVITIES: F. ACTIVITIES AFFECTING SEVERAL GOALS
• Indicators/Goals to be affected by the activity
X
X
X
Access
Course Completion
ESL and Basic Skills Course Completion
X
X
Degrees and Certificate Completion
Transfer
• Activity Type(s)
X
Outreach
X
X
Student Services or other
Categorical Program
Research and Evaluation
X
X
X
Student Equity
Coordination/Planning
Curriculum/Course Development or
Adaptation
Professional Development
X
Instructional Support Activities
X
Direct Student Support
• Target Student Group(s) & # of Each Affected*:
ID
Target Group
# of Students Affected
F.1
African-American
2,103
Hispanic
14,895
Pacific Islander
68
Economically Disadvantaged
17,019
Students with Disabilities
• Activity Implementation Plan
Activity
F.1
The student equity plan will
*Activity
Type (see
above)
1, 2, 3, 8
Expected Outcome
F.1.1 There will be a
Target
Date(s)
Responsible Parties
F.1.1: 2017
Dean, Institutional
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 59
support the college’s book grant
program for disproportionately
impacted target groups.
The student equity plan will
support the college’s effort to
assist students with basic human
survival resources, including
food, housing and child care.
F.3 The student equity plan will
support the college’s efforts
to create a campus climate
that ensures the target
groups learn in a
comfortable atmosphere.
F.4 The student equity plan will
support the college’s efforts
increase the faculty applicant
pools to better represent the
target populations.
F.2
marked decrease in the loss
of students in the target
population between the first
day of classes and census
and who complete courses
and persist toward degree
completion.
1, 2, 8
4; 6, 7
3, 4, 6
Research; Vice President,
Student Services
F.2.1 There will be in an
increase of persistence in
courses of students who are
declared as homeless or hungry,
and who otherwise would not
be able to complete school.
F.3.1 Student Satisfaction and
Climate surveys will reflect that
students from target
populations feel comfortable in
their learning environments.
F.2.1 –2018
Vice President, Student
Services; Director, Special
Populations & Equity
Programs; Dean, Institutional
Research
F.3.1 - 2018
Faculty Success Center
Coordinator; Director, Human
Resources
F.4.1 The will be substantial
increases in the recruitment
efforts and placements of
position announcements and
applicant pools.
F.4.2 Hiring committees for
the college will be trained in
unconscious biases in hiring
practices.
F.4.1 –
2017
Director, Human Resources;
President’s Equity Council;
Faculty Senate; Dean,
Institutional Research
F.4.2 2017
KEY: 1) Outreach; 2) Student Services or other Categorical Program; 3) Research and Evaluation; 4) Student Equity Coordination/Planning; 5)
Curriculum/Course Development or Adaption; 6) Professional Development; 7) Instructional Support Activities; and 8) Direct Student Support.
See Student Equity Expenditure Guidelines for more information.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 60
ID
F.1
F.2
F.3
F.4
Planned Start and End Date(s)
Spring 2016 – Fall 2016
Spring 2016 – Spring 2017
Summer 2016 – Fall 2016
Spring 2016 – Spring 2017
Student Equity Funds
$25,000
$82,500
$5,000
$20,000
Other Funds**
ASCC - $100,000
General Fund - $43,000
General Fund - $10,000
General Fund - $18,000
• Link to Goal
ID Link to Goal
F.1 There is a college-wide initiative to prevent students from stopping out from attending because they cannot afford or
purchase textbooks.
F.2 The college has placed a focus on serving students whose housing or hunger status has affected their performance in the
classroom, as well as their ability to persist and continue in school.
F.3 Students who feel like they belong at the campus are more likely to succeed and having a college that supports the target
populations particular background provides that since of belonging, which creates a desire to persist.
F.4 Having a faculty that represents the make-up of the student body increases the positive climate of the college and provides
students from the target populations a better sense of belonging and opportunity or mentoring.
• Evaluation
For each activity associated with Student Equity Indicator #5 (Transfer), Chaffey College has identified data collection timelines
and measurable metrics that directly relate to and assess expected outcomes:
 Activity F.1: Extracting data from the District’s administrative computing system (Colleague), every semester the OIR will identify all
enrollment withdrawal activity that occurs between the start date of the semester and first census date. Data will be disaggregated
by student demographic characteristics to determine student subpopulations that are most likely to engage in this behavior.
Withdrawal activity within this timeframe will be examined over time to determine whether observed withdrawal behavior –
specifically among student subpopulations who are most likely to engage in this behavior – declines over time.
 Activity F.2: The OIR will work with the Director of Special Populations to develop a low-intrusion, confidential mechanism to
identify homeless and/or socio-economically disadvantaged students who do not have access to basic human survival resources.
Among students who obtain basic human survival resources, the OIR will track Student Equity Indicator data to determine whether
performance outcomes experienced by this student subpopulation improve over time.
 Activity F.3: The OIR will facilitate the dissemination, collection, analysis, and reporting of a biennial Campus Climate Survey. Survey
items will be based upon factors identified by President’s Equity Council that support activities addressed in the Student Equity Plan
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 61
Disaggregated data will provide feedback from student subpopulations about their perceptions of the institution, support services,
and learning environment.
 Activity F.4.1 and F.4.2: Utilizing data generated by the Office of Human Resources and reported in the annual Recruitment Analysis
Monitoring Report, the OIR will examine the ratio of underrepresented employment applicants relative to the underrepresented
population in the recruitment service area.
Chaffey College Student Equity Plan - 62