×
×

American River College Integrated Planning System Reports

2021 Disproportionate Impact for Psychology and Human Services Overall
Drop Rate Metric (F18-S21)

The following is intended to provide an overview of where disproportionate impact (DI) exists in the Drop Rates (% W notations) of different racial/ethnic groups within your planning unit. Greater detail can be found in the Department DI Detail Spreadsheets which are available for each of the course designators in your department (PSYC, HSER). These nine-tab spreadsheets show your DI data at the department and course level, disaggregated by race, gender, and gender within race. (To protect the identity of faculty, DI statistics are provided only for courses that have been taught by at least three faculty members during the three years we merge for these reports. An unrestricted report may be obtained if all of a planning unit’s faculty are agreeable, and doing so typically results in DI data being reported for additional courses beyond those shown in the restricted version of the reports.)

Please refer to ARC’s DI Interpretation Guide for assistance in understanding and differentiating between ARC’s two DI reports (the web-based report shown here and the Dept DI Detail Spreadsheet(s), linked above)

Course African/
American		 Asian Filipino Hispanic/
Latino		 Multi-
Race		 Native/
American		 Other/
Non-White		 Pacific/
Islander		 White Unknown
HSER 300 red green yellow green green yellow yellow yellow green red
HSER 310 green yellow yellow green red yellow yellow yellow green yellow
HSER 330 green yellow yellow green yellow yellow yellow yellow green yellow
HSER 340 green yellow yellow green lightred P yellow yellow yellow green green
HSER 341 red yellow yellow green yellow yellow yellow yellow green yellow
HSER 342 green yellow yellow green yellow yellow yellow yellow green yellow
HSER 360 green yellow yellow green yellow yellow yellow yellow green yellow
HSER 362 lightred P yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow green yellow
HSER 365 lightred P yellow yellow green yellow yellow yellow yellow green yellow
HSER 498 green yellow yellow green yellow yellow yellow yellow green yellow
PSYC 300 red green green red red green yellow green green green
PSYC 305 red green yellow red green yellow yellow yellow green yellow
PSYC 310 green green green green green yellow yellow yellow green green
PSYC 311 green green green green green yellow yellow yellow green yellow
PSYC 320 green green green green green yellow yellow yellow green green
PSYC 330 green green green lightred P lightred P lightred P yellow green green green
PSYC 335 green green green green green yellow yellow yellow green yellow
PSYC 340 green green green green red yellow yellow yellow green yellow
PSYC 342 yellow yellow yellow green yellow yellow yellow yellow green yellow
PSYC 354 green green yellow green lightred P yellow yellow yellow green yellow
PSYC 356 red green green green green yellow yellow green green red
PSYC 361 red yellow yellow green yellow yellow yellow yellow green yellow
PSYC 365 yellow yellow yellow red yellow yellow yellow yellow green yellow
PSYC 370 red green green red green yellow yellow red green green
PSYC 372 green green green green red yellow yellow yellow green yellow
PSYC 373 lightred P green yellow green lightred P yellow yellow yellow green yellow
PSYC 374 green green yellow green red yellow yellow yellow green yellow
PSYC 390 lightred P green yellow green green yellow yellow yellow green yellow
PSYC 400 green lightred P yellow green yellow yellow yellow yellow green yellow
PSYC 401 yellow yellow yellow red yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow
PSYC 402 yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow
PSYC 480 yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow green yellow
PSYC 481 yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow green yellow

The Disproportionate Impact methodology shown here reflects the four different methodologies recommended by the State Chancellor's Office, including the most recent, the Percentage Point Gap Methodology with Margin of Error. Applied to the success rates of the courses your unit has offered over the last three years, the above table shows the following:

  • red     Groups with success rates showing Definite DI
  • lightred P     Groups with success rates showing Potential DI (rates within 3 points of the group’s DI threshold)
  • yellow     Groups with success rates that may possibly have DI, but for which too little data exists to be sure (<10)
  • green     Groups with success rates showing No Measurable DI

Download PDF