邢唷��>� z}��y��欹�{� ��XbjbjBrBr 4� P��tt��d�+f��*�*�*�*�*�*�*$w,�)/€�*��*��*___� ��*_��*__��%�0'��饅'亶��:T&|*�*0+h&��/5*�/(0'�/�0'L��_��*�*_��+��/��t �: College Planning Council Minutes Wednesday, November 28, 2012 3:00 � 4:30 p.m. Multidisciplinary Center West (MCW) � 312 Call to Order 3:05 p.m. Attendees: Robin Calote � President Kathy Scott � CPC Co Chair & Dean of Institutional Effectiveness/English/Learning Resources Peter Sezzi � CPC Co-Chair & President of Academic Senate/Asst Chair Language Lori Annala � EAC David Bransky � Asst. Dean, Student Services/Evening Dean Michael Callahan � Institutional Research Jenifer Cook � Instructional Data Specialist Robin Douglas � Supervisor Child Development Center Ty Gardner � Biology Instructor Robert Haines � Biology Instructor Sandy Hajas � Supervisor Learning Resources Tim Harrison � Dean Communication, Kinesiology, Athletics & Off-site Programs Gwendolyn Lewis-Huddleston � Dean Distance Education, Professional Development, Social Science & Humanities Grant Jones � Supervisor Tech Support Services Mary Jones � Coordinator/Nurse Practitioner David Keebler � V.P. Business Services Alexander Kolesnik � Interim Department Chair Math Dept. Dan Kumpf � Interim Dean, Math & Sciences Cari Lange � VP Academic Senate Eric Martinsen � Chair English Bob Moskowitz � Chair Art Peder Nielsen � President Classified Senate Art Sandford � Instructor Spanish Kathleen Schrader � Dean Career & Technical Education Minutes taken by Tricia Bergman Public Comments None Announcements/Information Items Review of accreditation visit Calote reported that she has not received any news from the Accreditation Team. She said that the Commission will send a draft out by the middle of December and there will be no action until the middle of February and that we will not hear any final decision until March. Spreadsheet of final funded program review initiatives Keebler distributed a copy of the program review initiatives, pointing out that there are 20 pages listed by category. For the category of no new resources, implementation could begin immediately. Initiatives requiring funding were still going through some of the committees and needed the final college priority. He went through the handout and said that he created a new line item that will hold back $150,000 for computer replacements. He said that G. Jones is planning to attend a stakeholder抯 meeting where he will present the high priority computer items. He (D. Keebler) will then do the final prioritization. J. Moore will be working with the high priorities for the facilities area, and Keebler added a new line item that will hold back $250,000 for emergencies. Recurring initiatives will be brought forward to the FY14 budget. For all categories, Keebler was clear that his intent was to retain the integrity of the priorities. At the BRC meeting questions were raised about some of the initiatives in terms of whether the items were 搑ecurring� or 搉on-recurring.� In the future, there will be a new column on the spreadsheet indicating which category in that regard. Sezzi stated that when the hearing dates for Faculty Staffing Priorities were moved back by one week it had a cascading effect that made it difficult to complete the work on time. He said that they will be mindful of that and will take that into consideration for next year. Sezzi said that the final initiatives will be presented at the first meeting of 2013 in January. Status on Mid-Term report self-assigned action steps/tasks Calote said that people have been sending information to her about the items on this list and that 95% of the self-assigned action steps have been addressed. She said she will be ready to share the information in the January meeting. She pointed out that our college accreditation committee, along with the department chairs need to get together to start putting together the mid-term report for next Fall and that of the 7 recommendations we have already addressed 4 of them and said it should not be too difficult. Results of the RP Group CTE Completer/Leaver Student Outcomes Survey Schrader discussed the handout regarding the results from the RP group CTE Completers and Leavers sharing that the conclusion summary showed that the vast majority of students were satisfied. She said the study group was given a survey to complete with follow-up phone calls and emails and felt that it was a good way to get the statistical results. She pointed out that it is frustrating for CTE because many students who go through the certificate training programs leave and get jobs but do not finish the program. Many students just take one or two classes, as that is all their employers require. She continued reviewing the RP group抯 findings based on our college抯 statistics versus the State抯 and found that the results were similar. Discussion ensued with points being made about how community college students tend to move on to get their bachelor抯 degrees elsewhere. And, also, many employers do not require degrees from their employees, but rather would like to train employees on-the-job. When students were asked what their goals where and why they left the program before completing it, most of their responses were that their goals had been met and they did not need to continue as they had secured a good paying job. K. Scott noted that the same kind of situation occurs with many ESL students. Many do not continue on to degree or certificate programs, but they get better jobs, which was their goal. It would be good to survey those students also. Schrader said that we have contracted with the RP group for another year to see what kind of trends are being established and that the outcome data on the group surveyed did capture some of the nuances from typical CTE programs. Gaines asked who came up with questions for the survey. Schrader said that the South Coast Consortium leaders had created a model of the type of information they wanted. Reports ASVC No report. Classified Senate Nielsen shared that the classified employees have been sad this past week because of the sudden passing of classified employee Isabel Tapia and that services were being held this evening. He shared that the classified priorities were completed and that everyone had done a good job. He ended by wishing everyone Happy Holidays. Academic Senate Sezzi shared that the final meeting of the Academic Senate will be held Thursday, December 6th and that the faculty抯 priorities meeting is going to be held on Friday, November 30th. He said Sue Johnson will be attending the next Senate meeting to talk about the District抯 allocation model. He said that Susan Bricker and Alma Rodriguez will be attending the next meeting to discuss DE and Financial Aid. DCAP Sezzi reported that the committee has not yet met but that they will need to do so to discuss the district-wide educational master plan. Technically the current one is good through 2015. However, the board approved a plan for us to adopt a new educational master plan by the end of this academic year. At the last DCAP meeting the Chancellor said we will not be hiring a consultant to do this work. BRC Keebler said that the BRC met last week and that FY13 is status quo. The FY14 budget will not increase nor decrease, but the the assumption is that there will be no major problems at the State level. Keebler anticipates that there may be. Basic Skills Committee K. Scott shared that at CPC we will be rotating committee reports. The accreditation team asked us to be sure that we have connections between the CPC and committees; however, we do not want to spend excessive amounts of time on committee reports at the expense of discussions we should be having on major issues. At this meeting, the basic skills committee report was given. The committee looked at the Basic Skills Cohort Tracker from State Chancellor抯 website and explained what the Cohert Tracker revealed. She said the state chancellor抯 office抯 main concern is that we are aware of the students leaving during the math and English sequences and that we find ways to keep students in the sequences in order to improve math and English completion rates. The cohort tracker tracks information for six years and feels that a student is successful if they passed college level math or English within that time frame. Martinsen said that he thought the data was useful. K. Scott said that faculty need to urge their students to finish the sequences. Sezzi suggested that a Qualitative Researcher could do a survey by giving students a phone call or follow-up email. Discussion Items Input on program review process 2012 K. Scott said the accreditation team had asked for follow-up responses from the CPC members on the program review presentations given by each department. She and Sezzi asked CPC members to give comments. Bransky said he considered the interactivity from the facilitators a huge plus and that he felt it was a critical element. Martinsen said that the facilitators were helpful but that there needs to be a point person � a go-to-person � that the department could communicate with in terms of their questions and concerns. Cook shared that she was new to the process, but enjoyed the presentations and learned so much. It gave her a better idea of what was happening throughout the campus. Annala said that she felt the timing of the deadlines was rushed creating a lot of pressure on the departments. Lupian said he felt things had improved from last year and that getting adequate budget data earlier would be more helpful with prioritizing the initiatives. M. Jones said the process at 51AV视频 was much different than at Oxnard College. She said it was very collegial and she saw a lot of interaction between departments. She felt that the division meeting was successful and that people felt good about what had been decided. Hajas shared that she had been involved with helping people fill out the forms and that she felt there needed to be more training on what was required. She would like to see that everyone receives appropriate information and see that they understand what is required on the forms. She also suggested that a glossary of terms with definitions be provided which would be very helpful. Schrader said her faculty seemed to be overwhelmed by all the data required and that her faculty had shared that it became cumbersome which took away from their ability to form their initiatives. She said there was not enough time to put into the process. But on the plus side, the faculty liked parts of the process because it was very interactive and she felt the facilitator in the meeting was very helpful. She said she thought the program reviews needed to be done sooner because many of her faculty needed help with their data. They felt that they were out there by themselves. Some faculty members were concerned that some of the data wasn抰 accurate and felt uncomfortable asking for help with the stats. She would like to see more effort made to alleviate their anxiety. Harrison felt that a faculty point person would be very helpful in the process, saying that the point person would ultimately be responsible for data collection. K. Scott said that the point person could be someone other than the department chair. Keebler said he had given a lot of feedback on data and information. He thought that housing the data in a place that is more secure and available to the divisions would be helpful. He felt that the rest of the process went well and offered that he hoped a new format similar to TracDat would make it more sustainable. He shared that $1 million will be spent this year on initiatives. Calote noted that last year students had participated in the process but that this did not occur this year. Keebler asked why students had not participated. Calote said that students lost their leadership coming into September and that recovery time had added to it. She said that we needed to anticipate leadership changes every year and that senate officers should become part of the process. She said that listening to people speak of their support for facilitators speaks to the value of that form of meeting and that it created an interactive type of meeting. She expressed that there are a number of really good facilitators on this campus this year and felt that professional development would enhance the facilitators� understanding by teaching them how to run the meetings. It would ensure a better way to utilize the meeting time rather than just sharing information. She pointed out that this would support two factors: 1) Continuity within the divisions. (She said that with her retirement and Sezzi stepping down as Academic Senate president, the training of facilitators would ensure overlap between people coming and going.) And 2) The categorical ranking systems of the initiatives. The facilitators helped people to understand that not every initiative could be ranked high. In looking at the initiatives, we seemed to have done a better job this year in that regard. Douglas said that she got a lot out of the meetings because she was able to learn so much about all the other areas of the campus. She became more aware of other departments� needs, and as a group, they were able to make more unified decisions. Kumpf felt that things went more smoothly this year than last year. He liked the fact that there were facilitators in the meetings and that the two meeting idea was a great idea this year. He said last year抯 process was too rushed. Huddleston said that she would like to get some ideas and input on how to begin the program review process in the summer so there would be more time to work through them. She shared that, overall, she enjoyed the collegiality and sharing during the meeting as everyone was able to see what other departments were doing and it provided an avenue to share information with everyone. K. Scott said that during the spring semester there would be more training on the program review process generally. She said she had looked at a number of program reviews which reflected that, in some areas, there is confusion between, for example, grades and SLOs. We need to ensure also that student learning is at the center of the program review process as has been made clear to us by WASC. Sezzi said that everyone on campus has to be involved in the program review process. It brings us all together and the longer we do this the more sustainable it becomes. He said we are half-way there and, that like driving a car, it is a learned skill. He shared that the utility of the program of review documents will continue to be a great value in all of us doing it every year. Moskowitz felt that the process needed to become more streamlined and felt that another committee should be formed to assist in the process. He said that it was gratifying that everyone worked together and was able to see the value of what was best in each area. He felt that the best part of the process was that everyone was able to come from different disciplines and work together. He also thanked Huddleston for her leadership. He felt that their meetings were very collegial. Sandford also felt that the collegiality created a better understanding between departments. Bergman said that from her viewpoint she felt the accreditation members were very pleased with the results from what was accomplished this past year and that she believed there would be a positive outcome this year. Haines shared that he felt there was too much data required that wasn抰 relevant and that certain data that is not relevant does not need to be analyzed (i.e., sex or racial breakdown of students). He suggested creating a rubric for the process. Lange said that the process this time around was more valuable. She felt that the meaningfulness of the data, being able to look at charts, etc., was very helpful. However, she pointed out that an explanation and interpretation of the data would have been more helpful. She said her only source of frustration was the volume of pages in the program review. She felt that a review and revision on parts of the form might be helpful. Kolesnik said that looking at all the data showed that some things seemed unexplainable or seemed to be irrelevant. He said that looking at data with someone else would be very helpful. Gardner said that he echoed the comments on the importance of the facilitators and Hajas� comments concerning the forms. He said it抯 important for people to learn how to create the initiatives and that altering the form would help track where the initiative were coming from. We would be able to track what we are supposed to be doing while still getting the needed resources. He said one of his concerns going into next year involved making the same kind of connections when we close the loop, specifically addressing which outcomes and findings on which loops we are closing. Hajas said that in the program review documents we did not relate the findings to a particular outcome. That was done last year but not this year. K. Scott said that she agreed with Gardner and that in meeting with the accreditation team it was hard to show them how are these related to SLOs assessments. She said we have to fix this issue next year, particularly with PSLOs. We have to ensure that student learning is at the center of the program review process. What is learned from CSLO assessments also must be included in program review. Nielson said the 揳uctioneer approach� is not good. However, he said that the presentations reflected how much this college really gets behind each other. What he learned from listening to others give their opinions is how everyone came together for the betterment of the college. He felt this was a great process and that everyone worked really hard to accomplish that. He said he would like to go out and encourage more people to come to the meetings and participate in them; more participation is needed campus-wide. Further discussion followed with comments made regarding how well the discontinuance program portion went. Other comments included the following: The EVP and President抯 office should participate in the program review process. There should be a clear definition given for each initiative category, including 搊ther.� A signature page with the final submission would bring more accountability to the program review because the people who sign the page would feel more sense of responsibility for authorship. Everyone who participated in the process should have their names be put on a public place (i.e., the college website) Schrader commented that she was concerned about the follow-up of the program reviews as she has not seen any information on what was approved and what was not approved and why. K. Scott responded that we will be notifying people and communicating the information very clearly this time. Calote said new infrastructure funding model money to support initiatives will be very good this year and that year after year we will continue to make progress. Action Items Approval of Minutes A handout of all the minutes from the October 24th meeting; the November 5th, 6th, & 7th program review meetings; the special November 13th CPC meeting; and the November 14th accreditation team meeting were given to all members for review. Approval of these minutes will be tabled to the January 30, 2013 meeting. 51AV视频 Vision & Mission Statement (First Reading) K. Scott passed out the proposed new vision and mission statement for 51AV视频. She shared that small groups were formed at the Campus Open Forum meeting on October 12th and discussed and offered suggestions on the mission statement. Upon recommendation, the word 揺mphasis� was changed to 揻ocus.� Calote shared that she felt it was in adequate enough shape to send to campus for general feedback and to go on to the Academic & Classified Senates for discussion. Once that had occurred then it would then come back to the CPC for final approval. She questioned taking out the word 搎uality.� K. Scott said it was a phrase that WASC had wanted us to use. Other Sezzi said that CPC meetings generally meet the 4th Wednesday of each month, but it should be noted that the January meeting will be held on the 5th Wednesday in January, January 30th. The December meeting will be skipped. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 4:44 p.m. ,7=xyz��黧镫顼泔塾鬯叮稁t俧俋t俋倀X倀�h遫n@堽�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫nCJPJ^JaJ)h遫n5�>*@��CJPJ\乛JaJwh%h遫n5�>*CJPJ\乛JaJwh)h遫n5�>*@�CJPJ\乛JaJwhh遫nCJaJh頮9hFV�5�h頮9hoG[5�h+�hR2vh焲�hoG[h�;�hUnxhoG[5�"!>Oyz�� a s � � ��勳�剟剺�d��]勳�^剟`剺龷d�!%勳�剟剺�d��]勳�^剟`剺龷d�!%d棹� �gd遫n &F �勑d��^勑gd�!%$d��a$gd遫n$d��a$gdUnx�� 蜾蜇蜇守潋劁仳劁劁仳仳湄钾蜾蚣蜇蜇潋仳劁蜇蜇劁仳仳貭仳仳�h遫n@堳�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堼�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@��CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堻�CJPJ^JaJh遫nCJPJ^JaJh遫n@堽�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJ; ! & ' ( * + - . 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 : @ A B C E F H I J K L M Q R W X Z [ \ ] c d e f g h i n 蜴厥媸尕舒劓舒舒舒际厥娈媸尕鏍媸鎾媸鎲媸媸际媸媸鎾舒hsJGCJPJ^JaJh遫n@��CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堷�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堺�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堼�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堽�CJPJ^JaJh遫nCJPJ^JaJh遫n@堹�CJPJ^JaJ4n o p q � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � % & * + , 0 蜴蜴蜴仳骝媸婕蜴蜴蚴蜴蚣仳婕劓兼蜴蚣蜴犳蚣蜇婕鎾尕骝劓h遫n@堻�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堽�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堼�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@��CJPJ^JaJh遫nCJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJ80 1 2 3 5 : ; > ? @ B C D F I J L M O P Q R S T U V X Y [ \ _ c d f g h i j m n 蜴厥婕媸兼兼舒犳貝媸悁鎟d媸r媸尕媸兼�hsJGCJPJRHc^JaJh遫nCJPJRHc^JaJh遫n@�CJPJRHc^JaJh遫n@��CJPJRHc^JaJh遫n@堻�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堺�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@��CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堼�CJPJ^JaJh遫nCJPJ^JaJh遫n@堷�CJPJ^JaJ' 8 Y | � � b��Hh��% ��勳�剟剺�d撖�]勳�^剟`剺龷d�!%創剟剺�d��]創 ^剟`剺龷d�!%剟剺�d��^剟`剺龷d�!%勳�剟剺�d��]勳�^剟`剺龷d�!%n r s t u v w x y ~ € � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 翩翩翩劓翩羰羰翩兼翩舢翩兼糌艏骠媸羰魻羰骠剪佤骠属属掫h遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堷�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堽�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@��CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堼�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫nCJPJ^JaJ6� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ab��蜴劓舒舒舒钾舒兼犳守捸鎰劓勬豽豽劓际尕舒勬hsJG@�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堼�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堻�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@��CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堽�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫nCJPJ^JaJh遫n@堺�CJPJ^JaJ.�� !蜴蜇媸劓舒蜴劓舒劓钾骝尕守蜴尕婕劓钾鏍骝劓蜴简骝劓斬�h�!%CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堶�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堻�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堽�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堼�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫nCJPJ^JaJh遫n@��CJPJ^JaJ7!"#$%&)*+,-12345679:;<=@ABCDEHLMOPRSTUVWX[蜾质际质渲十咒手始始输始输旨薁悹悹€爯p爯�h遫n@堽�CJEHPJ^JaJh遫n@堼�CJEHPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJEHPJ^JaJh遫nCJEHPJ^JaJh遫n@堺�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@��CJPJ^JaJh遫nCJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堽�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJ)[\]^_`acdeglnopqrstuvwxy~€��疴衣獠庖枅杬垨垨z杔朸朸朸朢枅�h苪�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@��CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堻�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堽�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫nCJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJEHPJ^JaJh遫n@堶�CJEHPJ^JaJh遫n@堽�CJEHPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJEHPJ^JaJh遫nCJEHPJ^JaJh遫n@��CJEHPJ^JaJ �� 蜾质涫际渲输输之薁十输手蕭手涫喪涫质x薁输质涫h遫n@堹�CJPJ^JaJh苪�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堼�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@��CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堻�CJPJ^JaJh遫nCJPJ^JaJh遫n@堽�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堺�CJPJ^JaJ/ ! % & E F G V W \ ] } ~ � � � � � � � � ��蜴劓蜴黍婕娈骝兼蜴︽洍弴�彈w僺�僶僯 hu�5�hO�h:~�h頮9hR2v5�hFV�h扝{h頮9hu�5�h頮9hoG[5�hu�h遫nh遫nCJaJh遫nCJaJh遫n@堼�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@��CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堽�CJPJ^JaJh遫n@堸�CJPJ^JaJh遫nCJPJ^JaJh遫n@�CJPJ^JaJ&% & F G W \ ] } ~ � ��{mW &F ��剟d��^剟gd�!% 勑d��^勑gdFV� &F ��勪�d��^�`勪齡d�!% �8d��^�8gdFV� �d��^�gd�!% &F �勑d��^勑gd�!%剟剺�d��^剟`剺龷d�!%剟剺�dL��^剟`剺龷d�!%剟剺�d棹� �^剟`剺龷d�!% � ��45��v 勑d��`勑gdL]�$ ��剟勑d��^剟`勑a$gd�!% ��剟勑d��^剟`勑gd�!%$ ��剟d��^剟a$gd�!%$ &F ��剟d��^剟a$gd�!%$d��a$gd|Iw$剟d��^剟a$gd�!% ��"#=[�"6A��Xw��3MNx��Qd�� C� FGX_iu�黠邕镗综综综子紫综综子子鬯鬯鬯鬯矍鬯姿盟克盟盟盟们盟盟没顺浚浚h^k�hph頮9hR2v5�h頮9h0H55�hu�h開�h�2XhWp�hL]�hO�h:~�h扝{h9�h頮9h蒒�5�h頮9hE<�5�h頮9h僠5�hu�hu�5�@GOP��_`E��j�$ ��剟剺�d��^剟`剺龵$gd�!% ��剟剺�d��^剟`剺龷d�!%$ ��剟d��^剟a$gd�!%$ &F ��剟d��^剟a$gd�!%$d��a$gd|Iw$ ��剟d��^剟a$gd�!% &F ��剟d��^剟gd�!% ��23Mklx��$8<NP��9EUV 19��€��5��*Ipq^_€�$)EFL~��溧茑卦伉胸胸匦匦匦匦伉徐刑蕴蕴蕴蕴仍心阅阅兰镍脑脑h=�h�+�h{�huh�%h��hf%hd(+h頮9h.eh頮9h頮95�h,Q\h開�h^k�hO�hpJEF�� j ��q_�� 剟d��^剟gd�!% ��剟d��^剟gd�!% &F ��剟d��^剟gd�!% d��gdu� &F ��>�d��^�`�>龷d�!%$勑勑d��^勑`勑a$gd|Iw$ ��剟d��^剟a$gd�!%$ ��剟剺�d��^剟`剺龵$gd�!% �� VZg i j k { � � .!0!1!2!L!O!b!!�!�!�!�!�!�!�!"""T"~"�"�"�"�"�"�"�"M#[#f#j#}#�#�#�#�#�#痿扈痿滂滂痂苡膳脚古蹬杯┡饱怒潤╄櫓晳钁钁钁晬hz�hn]xh `�hw9h�#�h蒒�5�h銴�hf%h:~�h頮9h��hO�hO�hO�H*hO�hO�hO�@堻�H*hO�hO�@堻�h�#�hoG[5�h�hslEh|Iwhu�h頮9hoG[5�h{�6j k { """�#�#�#�$�$�$�%�%X)Y)j)�� &F �d��gd�!% d��gdu� &F ��剟d��^剟gd�!% ��剟d��^剟gd�!%$ &F ��剟d��^剟a$gd�!%$ ��剟d��^剟a$gd�!%�#�#�#�#$1${$�$�$�$�$�$�$�$�$�$i&m&�&�&�&�&�&'�'F(_(i(�(�(�(�(�(�(�(W)Y)j)k)�)�)�)�)�)�)�)**&*(*)***+*H*\*^*�*�*�*�*+:+I+c+n+t+€+�+黧矬矬镫镧泱喵埏坫圩埏埏塾塾塾巯巯圻敲磺烦烦烦烦梅映隅崇秤�hx^h"�hsp�h^Gh�#�h0H55�h�#�h�#�hoG[5�h�9<�h俧�hO�h�7hu�hz�h:~�hWp�h `�hN�h�#�h�'5�Cj)k)�)]*^*�*�*�+�+G,H,�,�,X-Y-s.t.�/�/334�� 剟d��^剟gd�!%$ ��剟d��^剟a$gd�!% &F ��剟d��^剟gd�!% �*d��^�*gd�#��+�+�+�+,J,},�,�,�,W-X-Y-s-u-�-�-�-�-...r.t./ /�/�/�/�/00080j0p0|0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0 1-122(2B2G2O2W2f2k2�2�2�2�23333V3c3�3�3�3�3�3�3444F4G4B5禅羿溧燔攒攒糗滠熊茕熹燔绦莒蠕芴苄茕苋莒苣心h亄�h �h�#�h�!%hYM�hMJbhPEh薒�h俧�h:~�huu7h�#�hO�hx^hsp�L44�5�5�:�:�;�;�<��<�_>a>�?�?rAsAYCZC窩笴��$ ��剟d��^剟a$gd�!% ��剟d��^剟gd�!%$ ��剟d��^剟a$gd�!%$ ��剟勑d��^剟`勑a$gd�!%B5�5�5�5�5�5�5�5�566#6$6%676B6s6�6�6�6�6�6�6�6�6�6�6�6�6777"7#7$7,7R7�7�7�7�7�7�7�7�788B8T8`8r8�8�8�8�8�8�8�8�8�8�8/909?9U9V9W9`9�9�9:::::=:�:I;];~;�;�;�;�;�<�豇豇麴豇豇祠祠痿豇豇翳翳綮豇豇豇彷糍翳蒽桊桊祓祓枵桫枵枵h�/h� kh�!%hp4Hhp4Hh=hO�h俧�h亄�huu7h�1€T�<��<��<��<��<��<��<��<��<��<��<�= =(=+=0=1=K=T=]=k=~=�=�=�=�=�=�=�=�=�=�=�=�=�=�=�=�= >%>'>1>3>;>D>O>^>_>`>a>j>s>z>�>�>�>�>�> ??�?�?�?欯汙紷継qArAsA婣�ABmBoB鶥�BCC&C'C/CHC豇痨椟椟桊桎痂痂囵椟柢桊莛桊柢桊椟椟柝柝痂鹭熵熵熵莒煸爨禳煸疖朽悬悬熊朽熊h齛�hp�hp4Hh�/h� khMJbh��h7�huu7h�!%h=h�#�RHCZCvC禖窩笴薈軨D)D2DMD扗揇窪腄虳釪霥鵇EEXEYE圗塃奅嶦廍滶狤蒃蔈蹺鮁�EF/F0FMFNFaFpF{F孎獸禙餏馞GuG圙旼橤燝盙矴菺贕鵊鶪鸊H'HIHMHNHrHuH岺欻瘘禳禳禳桎噤噤痄痄痄痿柢漯湄漯漯湄漯漯漯漯湄漯责叙蔷稻蔷丘责孕鹪柙�h� kh� k@堻�h� kh��@堻�h� kh(F�@堻�h�#�h��h� khP :huu7h7�hna�hMJbh(F�h �h�/h齛�G笴慏扗塃奅=G>G鶪鸊gLhLsNtNOOYOZO禣稯霵鞵RR砇碦�� 剟d��^剟gd�!%$ ��剟d��^剟a$gd�!%欻璈綡鉎餒鬑I,I8IMIeIlIvIwIxI婭扞擨旾㊣睮綢諭J"J@JAJFJiJoJpJtJ{J圝↗㎎訨認 KK*K0KDKHKIKfKiKrKsKtK~K並岾fLhLxLyL{L峀嶭廘扡橪歀稬螸鉒MMMIM凪朚㎝組躆N@NJNrNsNtN逳郚'O豇豇豇豇黹翦酎妩翦翦徨轸轸弭蔌蔌蔌蔌蔹嬴冱冱嬴召辄h?�h鮃�h b�h譣�huu7h� khuu7huu7h��h(F�hna�T'OWOZOlOrO頞P/PtPuP隤霵鞵漄濹烸≦稱翾RRR/R;R睷碦繰罵諶SS"S$S'S)S.S0SaScS凷哠糞縎荢萐隨馭TT>TNTOTXT馮骉鬞⺄禳酎桎椟桫扈扈茏纤盟盟盟盟盟盟克羲克矾Н魺繜�h+GXh�3�hMJbh�'5�hMJbhR2v5�hMJbhF]o5�h譣�h+GXhkm�H*hkm�hMJbhMJb5� hoG[5�hMJbhoG[5�hMJbh?�h�!�hp�h� khna�h鮃�=碦罵翿諶TTOT僓刄闢隫馰��~i &F �勑d��^勑gd�!% ��剟d��^剟gd�!%$ ��剟d��^剟a$gd�!%$ ��剟d��^剟a$gd�!%$ &F ��剟d��^剟a$gd�!%$�*d��^�*a$gdMJb$ &F ��>�d��^�`�>龵$gd�!%⺄UUUU'UBUXU`UkUyU€U俇僓刄猆頤骍鱑VV)V*VOV^VeVmV猇玍閂隫馰W W"W$WBWUW僕匴廤歐淲╓猈玏蟇蠾裌襑軼轜鸚XX黧矬矬塍矬矬镧镢镢镢镞镢镢镞镗语腼孙腼孙腼炼镞锊訛霘�hUnxhoG[h�*h��hoP5�h*/�*huu7h+GXh� �hoPh+GX5�>*H*hoPh+GX5�>*huu7h+GXH*h��hoG[5�hu�h� kh�8�h%.hoPh+GXhMJbhMJbhMJbH*7馰裌襑轜X�� d��^�gd�!% &F �d��gd�!% d��gdu� �d��^�gd�!%21恏:pL}�靶/ 班=!盃"盃#悹$悹%�靶靶愋f 666666666666666666666666666666666666666666 6666666666 666666666666 6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666662�� 0@P`p€��2(�� 0@P`p€�� 0@P`p€�� 0@P`p€�� 0@P`p€�� 0@P`p€�� 0@P`p€�8X�V~OJQJ_HmH nH sH tH J`�J:�NormaldとCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA ��D Default Paragraph FontRi��R 0Table Normal�4� l4�a�(k ��( 0No List@矦�@Unx0List Paragraph ^勑m$R橜R �;�0Balloon Textd��CJOJQJ^JaJN䁖�N�;�0Balloon Text CharCJOJQJ^JaJPK!檗�[Content_Types].xml瑧薔�0E鱄鼉�-J湶@%閭菐洽|廊�$韶钵UL襎B� l,�3鳛;鉹�得槣B+$�G]ミ7O侪V墎$�┇最�!)O赹齬虲$駓@摪磔�/瓂H*�橊劥�)戅祶鬟粖譛Db俙}"譹蹕擩讞枻肵^�)I`n蘀�紛p)�杵li筕[]�1M<斷绒彥O蠵擊6r�=瘔抸纆b營g吜u崘S賓b嘱€O缽嗕掘肦罝郢櫉反qu 痝嫎Z岸串o~俸lAp發x妏T0�+[}`j纂鹾絲A�帮儲V�2虵蒳朄鰍瀡分�5\|夻蕼汰Nвle瞂�ds趈cs倭惻7琊嵨f坊赅肉W琊�+唻7爤唁`�陲g�葮稠J�雷j|唫h(�驞-姷咩� dX�﹊J曝�(钼x$(��:隶;渌�!�I_蠺到S1ｗ犍鳢�?E��?勉?ZB为m渼錟/魁煜��?瀪篁�誼Y�'奎鼀5襣&螊/燑鲮蓩�>籊餗丟e鴲艱�眢3Vq%'#q��域娡$�8翚K秊�敉)f檞9:牡�澹 x}r�x墘�渨⒇顁�:\TZaG�*檡8I耲鎎R祈c|X呕�强絀 u3KG駈D1�NIB襰鼆� 眍R曦u楘侹>V�.EL+M2�#'歠嫸i~橵�l硔u8z�篐� �*�鏄�:�(W�鈽� ~J攘T鴈\O*餿HG絸HY垫�}KN吡P�*菥甩眿�T鸭�9/#辐A7聁Z��$*c?��韖U咤n嗚w�N蝴%幓O�穒鑸4=3炯N�績)cbJ u�4峦(Tn酸� 7斒_?異鹠-贈皗U逄鰤B�w�襷消╪湐鞘�"Zx娬J躗氺p;嫇熟劐辿/�<�P;檸,)''K蠶踜5棝騫邛苝N喦8疜軬b耬摨� 鸖撡d洯\17 阷鮝�>ОSR!�枒 3晠K4'+�r蘻Q TT３I辈琉疘vt]K芻猥渤K#趘�5+D�眽厍鄜獱O@%\w槉燺鄋N[跮古9K候崢临q桃g錠炆n R!儁+�篣蕁�;�*&�/H時�蟃邀 �>��>\ 宼Υ=.T摹 �觖S; Z鄜�!ㄠ傏�銹��9gi槾咰ぺ�!�# B鰻,欒;匵=刍,I�2UW�9$l╧嗒捋=Aj挄�;顊朅79鍇s*Y摈�;浱爺[嘙C撣�県f华]o栫{oY=1k�yV骋V惺隐5E8鏥k+譁扑蚛8疴计0X4D)�!!��?*|f縱� u洒《"鴛A谸T_矋��帬q矁6�4)k诂u襐�7�顃�'尛%;嬁蟟膦9s�9箈懫�,熵趲-45x鰀娐�8?�菢蟙�/Y|t��&LIL饾J`琛& �-G硉�/��PK! 褠煻'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.rels剰M �0匃倃oo雍�&輬协�勪5 6?$Q祉 �,.嘺緳i粭澤c2�1h�:闀q毩m胳嶡RN壻;d癭値o7�g慘(M&$R(.1榬'J摐袏T鶂�8V�"＆A然蠬鱱}狇�|�$絙{�朠�除8塯/]As賲(⑵锑#洩L蔥汉倪��PK-!檗�[Content_Types].xmlPK-!ブх�60_rels/.relsPK-!ky��theme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!0軨)��theme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! 褠煻'� theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK]� P�� n 0 n � �![� ��#�+B5�<�HC欻'O⺄X-/012456789:=?ACEGHIKLN % � Ej j)4笴碦馰X.3;<�>@BDFJMO餖�#�喠帕@��€€€�饞��0�( � �養 �S�� ?�P�� 22DCHCP3333�� $$UV��~12��*"+"�#$�%�%&&' '�(�($.%.�.�.//�0�02222P鰔4`賵��!rq杴��3�黏N��軾�(X+悵��D3�)魔��弌Dg慂&��a~淒\��劆剺⺗劆`剺⺗Jo(.€刾剺⺗刾`剺⺗J.�凘凩�^凘`凩�^J.€�剺⺗�`剺⺗J.€勦剺⺗勦`剺⺗J.�劙凩�^劙`凩�^J.€剙剺⺗剙`剺⺗J.€凱剺⺗凱`剺⺗J.�� 凩�^� `凩�^J.�*�0齘�*`�0齘Jo(.劆剺��^劆`剺⺗Jo(.刾凩�^刾`凩�OJQJo(佛€凘剺⺗凘`剺⺗J.€�剺⺗�`剺⺗J.�勦凩�^勦`凩�^J.€劙剺⺗劙`剺⺗J.€剙剺⺗剙`剺⺗J.�凱凩�^凱`凩�^J.劆剺⺗劆`剺⺗Jo(.刾剺⺗刾`剺⺗J.�凘凩�^凘`凩�^J.€�剺⺗�`剺⺗J.€勦剺⺗勦`剺⺗J.�劙凩�^劙`凩�^J.€剙剺⺗剙`剺⺗J.€凱剺⺗凱`剺⺗J.�� 凩�^� `凩�^J.�8�0齘�8`�0齘Jo(.劆剺⺗劆`剺﨩JQJo(佛刾凩�^刾`凩�OJQJo(佛凘剺⺗凘`剺⺗J.�剺⺗�`剺⺗J.勦凩�^勦`凩�^J.劙剺⺗劙`剺⺗J.剙剺⺗剙`剺⺗J.凱凩�^凱`凩�^J.劆剺��^劆`剺⺗Jo(.刾剺⺗刾`剺﨩JQJo(佛凘凩�^凘`凩�OJQJo(佛€�剺⺗�`剺⺗J.€勦剺⺗勦`剺⺗J.�劙凩�^劙`凩�^J.€剙剺⺗剙`剺⺗J.€凱剺⺗凱`剺⺗J.�� 凩�^� `凩�^J.�8剺��8^�8`剺﨩JQJo(佛�剺⺗�`剺﨩JQJo(佛勜凩�^勜 `凩�OJQJo(佛劏剺⺗劏`剺⺗J.剎剺⺗剎`剺⺗J.凥凩�^凥`凩�^J.�剺⺗�`剺⺗J.勮剺⺗勮`剺⺗J.劯凩�^劯`凩�^J.劆剺⺗劆`剺⺗Jo(.€刾剺⺗刾`剺⺗J.�凘凩�^凘`凩�^J.€�剺⺗�`剺⺗J.€勦剺⺗勦`剺⺗J.�劙凩�^劙`凩�^J.€剙剺⺗剙`剺⺗J.€凱剺⺗凱`剺⺗J.�� 凩�^� `凩�^J.!�a~鰔4�3�D3�)弌Dg軾�(��碫b� �9 睒� b TE ��"i蝒疪.ew.�%N讄;T![K$p,僠qf%�(燷x^�8HPEz#W~6�;-?n"燚#�%�!%B_%�'�*d(+鵻-%.€W.�/P030H5�7uu7w9頮9P :�9<�=5>%t?N{@�CslEF�:F-jF^GsJGp4H�)NO(R�=S�2X+GX�Zb>ZCbZoG[x\,Q\諾]篟_�bi2bMJbpTb�cPdoqfIj� k遫nF]o p+/ruR2v|Iwn]x3nxUnx扝{oP�1€:e�t"�(F��1�郟�區�{�銴�韁�盓��,��#�65�Wp�畕��9�簁�km� �7��z��FV�焲�cL�鮃�4�巭�:�Yw�sp�=��YM��6�?�^k�~�"�O�沯�譟�鎟�巘�!�襭��GB�萢��8��L}�璷�)w�� 腁�齛�俧��<�E?�苪�� b�朒�鮙�:~�+�p�薒�p�*n�*/�oI�O�7�u�� N��#���D�Bs��蒒��!�譣�na�mI�{��E<�V<�� ^��+� `�亄� H�開�鍾��;�9�L]��3�qk�>(�PP�@€��Pp@��Unknown��G��*郃x� �Times New Roman5�€Symbol3.��*郈x� �Arial7.��@ �Calibri5.��.醄`�)�TahomaA��$B�Cambria Math"��鹦hbGA�G'bG�D(��D(�!��亖20軴軴C��HX � $P��Unx2!xx��College Planning CouncilUserNatawni Pringle(�鄥燆鵒h珣+'迟0�� 8DP \hpx€�College Planning CouncilUserNormalNatawni Pringle7Microsoft Office Word@q@BX�7�@��4�@� 亶��D�胀諟.摋+,0hp€�� VCCCD�(軴College Planning CouncilTitle !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<�=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOP��RSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefgh��jklmnop��rstuvwx��{|��Root Entry�� F�'亶�~1Table��Q�/WordDocument ��4�SummaryInformation(��iDocumentSummaryInformation8��qMsoDataStore��皨'亶�饅'亶��S��5��U4�KM�4�X��Q==2��皨'亶�饅'亶�Item ��Properties��UCompObj�� r�� F Microsoft Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.8�9瞦