Expanded Ethnicity question... is everyone bringing in all 194 options?

  • 1
  • Question
  • Updated 3 months ago
  • Acknowledged
Hi all!

I was just curious how some of our fellow Community Colleges are handling bringing in the new SB38 - Expanded Ethnicity question for MIS / Chancellor's Office reporting. Did you update your file to bring in all 194 subcategories of ethnicity?  What did you do about the existing 21 that we had before?  Any help/ideas are very much appreciated :)

- Brenda Dokken
Chaffey College
Photo of Brenda Dokken

Brenda Dokken

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes

Posted 3 months ago

  • 1
Photo of Nina Eusebio

Nina Eusebio

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
At the 4CUG/CHUGACUG conference this month, we discussed this topic in the MIS group.  Most of the Colleague colleges were putting in all 194.  There was a 1:1 match for most of the existing codes.  We talked to Todd Hoig in the MIS group at the CO and he said for the ones that don't have a 1:1 match for MIS, to code them as 'other', such as W. to Other White.
Photo of Brenda Dokken

Brenda Dokken

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thank you Nina,  this is pretty much what I was going to do.  My concern is actually with our VAL table for PERSON.RACES - I can do the 1:1 no problem - I think I got 15 of the 21 to pretty much pair up... But no matter what I do - I would have to load the VAL table up with the 21 race_ethnic's (or race_groups) AND the 194 from race_ethnic_full? I get how to fill out the CAST.PERSON.RACES translate table - but I want to make sure I don't totally botch what's coming into my SB28 Student Multi-Ethnicity field. Does that make sense?
Photo of Nina Eusebio

Nina Eusebio

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Brenda--If you send me an email at neusebio@4cd.edu, I can send you a copy of the PERSON.RACES valcode table and the CAST.PERSON.RACES tables for Colleague.
Photo of severa

severa, Champion

  • 101 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes

The existing 21 will remain untouched, i think so people don't have to do anything to continue to get them. Note also that the original ones were reported in two formats: one was a list of values (race_group), the other was essentially the SB29 string (race_ethnic). In the new implementation, only the list of values is being provided (so far anyway :-) ). since most people will only have at most a handful of these, you'll never actually get the full 194 values (though I've done this in testing just to see). I also wrote code as part of our import process that converts the list to the SB38 MIS string (looks like SB29, just much longer :-) ). I don't know if cccnext will eventually add that, but if you report to MIS, you'll probably want to do something similar. How to support these values in your SIS, is a very different question. initially we will store just the list of values and the SB38 string. But eventually we will add all of these expanded ethnicity values to our set of supported ethnicities/race groups.
One other point of note: it seems possible to select the new race group values only and leave all of the new ethnicity values blank (at least this was possible in pilot). Since those race groups are not actually part of the new MIS code list, that will leave you with no ethnicity by default. I mention this because you may want to look at setting a default ethnicity in this case.
Sorry about the extended answer, but I've been thinking about this one lately..  :-)