Spring 2021 Campus-wide Participatory Governance Survey Analysis
Analysis of the 2020-2021 Participatory Governance Survey results conducted on campus in Spring 2021, presented by Alex Claxton to the Planning and Budgeting Council on May 5, 2021. The report includes insights on the response rate and key findings from the survey.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Participatory Governance Survey 2020-2021 Analysis of Spring 2021 campus-wide survey results prepared by Alex Claxton, Research Analyst Office of Planning, Research & Institutional Effectiveness (PRIE) Presented to the Planning and Budgeting Council (PBC) May 5, 2021
Response rate 156 People started the survey Non-completer by Constituency 5 Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor 4 Faculty 56 students 88 surveys completed Nearly double from last year Student participation increased 1,100% 1 partial completer included
Survey Question Scale Most questions had participants rank from Strongly Agree (5) to Strongly Disagree (1) When looking at averages, the more intense the agreement/disagreement the further the average will be from 3 3-4 indicates general moderate agreement (2-3 general moderate disagreement) 4-5 indicates general strong agreement (1-2 strong disagreement)
Respondent Constituency Count by Constituency Group Student, 36 Faculty (full time), 21 Faculty, 30 Faculty (part time), 9 Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor, 18 Administrator, 3
Overall Information on Meetings 4.5 4.2 4.1 3.9 4.0 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Administrator Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor Faculty (full time) Faculty (part time) Student
Information on Meetings 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 PBC ASCC IPC SSPC Academic Senate Classified Senate GP Steering College committees Administrator Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor Faculty (full time) Faculty (part time) Student
Information on Meetings 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Administrator Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor Faculty (full time) Faculty (part time) Student PBC ASCC IPC SSPC Academic Senate Classified Senate GP Steering College committees
Overall Comfort with Recording 5.0 4.3 4.5 3.9 3.8 4.0 3.7 3.6 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Administrator Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor Faculty (full time) Faculty (part time) Student
Comfort with Recording 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 PBC ASCC IPC SSPC Academic Senate Classified Senate GP Steering College committees Administrator Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor Faculty (full time) Faculty (part time) Student
Comfort with Recording 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Administrator Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor Faculty (full time) Faculty (part time) Student PBC ASCC IPC SSPC Academic Senate Classified Senate GP Steering College committees
General Participatory Governance 5.0 4.7 4.5 4.1 4.0 3.8 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Administrator Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor Faculty (full time) Faculty (part time) Student The campus community are encouraged to participate Roles and responsibilities are clear
Overall Participatory Governance The participatory governance process is working well at Ca ada. 5.0 4.3 4.5 4.0 3.6 3.5 3.3 3.3 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Administrator Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor Faculty (full time) Faculty (part time) Student
Program Review Overall 5.0 4.3 4.5 3.8 4.0 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Administrator Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor Faculty (full time) Faculty (part time) Student
Program Review detail 5.0 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.5 4.1 3.9 3.8 3.8 4.0 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.5 3.1 3.0 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Administrator Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor Faculty (full time) Faculty (part time) Student I understand program review's role in aligning program and college goals I engage in dialogue about program and/or course assessment results I understand how program assessment informs decisions about curriculum, program development and/or resource allocation. The program review process is an effective way to evaluate programs on campus
Budget 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.6 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.5 3.1 3.0 2.8 3.0 2.3 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Administrator Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor Faculty (full time) Faculty (part time) Student I understand the resource request process and how it relates to program reviews and annual updates. Ca ada College employees have adequate opportunities to participate in resource prioritization Budget average
College Goals I am aware of Ca ada's goals for the College. 120% 100% 100% 81% 80% 72% 67% 60% 50% 40% 20% 0% Administrator Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor Faculty (full time) Faculty (part time) Student
Planning 6.0 5.0 4.8 4.7 5.0 4.2 4.0 4.0 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.6 4.0 3.4 3.4 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Administrator Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor Faculty (full time) Faculty (part time) Student The College works collaboratively towards the goals. I am satisfied with the opportunity I have to participate in college-wide planning Planning average
Overall District Procedures 5.0 4.3 4.5 4.0 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Administrator Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor Faculty (full time) Faculty (part time) Student
District Procedures 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.0 4.0 4.0 3.9 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 4.0 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.1 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Administrator Classified Staff or Manager/Supervisor Faculty (full time) Faculty (part time) Student I am aware of SMCCCD policies and procedures. The District procedures for hiring full-time, permanent employees are clearly communicated. District planning and evaluation are integrated with college planning and evaluation to improve student learning and achievement. There are clear divisions of authority between the District Office, the Board of Trustees, and Ca ada College.
