×
×

American River College Integrated Planning System Reports

2022 Disproportionate Impact for Business, Marketing, Real Estate, Management Overall
A_B Rate Metric (F19-S22)

The following is intended to provide an overview of where disproportionate impact (DI) exists in the A-B Rates (% A,B grades) 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 (BUS, MKT, RE). 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
BUS 100 red green yellow red red yellow yellow yellow red yellow
BUS 105 red green yellow red red yellow yellow yellow lightred P yellow
BUS 110 red green yellow red green yellow yellow yellow green yellow
BUS 210 red yellow yellow red green yellow yellow yellow green yellow
BUS 212 green yellow yellow green green yellow yellow yellow green yellow
BUS 214 red red yellow green green yellow yellow yellow green yellow
BUS 216 red green yellow green green yellow yellow yellow green yellow
BUS 218 red yellow yellow red red yellow yellow yellow green yellow
BUS 220 yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow
BUS 224 lightred P green yellow lightred P red yellow yellow yellow green yellow
BUS 300 red green green red red green yellow red green lightred P
BUS 310 red green green lightred P red yellow yellow yellow green green
BUS 312 red green yellow red green yellow yellow yellow green lightred P
BUS 317 lightred P lightred P yellow green yellow yellow yellow yellow lightred P yellow
BUS 320 red lightred P red lightred P red green yellow yellow green green
BUS 330 red red yellow red green yellow yellow yellow green red
BUS 332 yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow
BUS 340 red green green red red red yellow green green green
BUS 350 red green yellow red red yellow yellow yellow lightred P green
BUS 498 yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow
MKT 300 red green green lightred P green yellow yellow yellow green green
MKT 310 yellow yellow yellow green red yellow yellow yellow lightred P yellow
MKT 312 red green yellow green green yellow yellow yellow green yellow
MKT 314 yellow yellow yellow red yellow yellow yellow yellow green yellow
MKT 330 red red yellow red red yellow yellow yellow green yellow
MKT 498 yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow yellow
RE 300 red green green lightred P red yellow yellow yellow green green
RE 310 red green yellow red red yellow yellow yellow green green
RE 320 red green yellow red red yellow yellow yellow green yellow
RE 330 red green yellow red red yellow yellow yellow red yellow
RE 342 red green yellow green yellow yellow yellow yellow red yellow
RE 350 red green yellow green yellow yellow yellow yellow green yellow
RE 360 red yellow yellow red 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