The University of Texas-Pan American National Survey of Student Engagement 2013 Presented by: November 2013 Office of Institutional Research & Effectiveness

5 Year Response Rates Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness

4 Themes for Student Engagement Indicators Academic Challenge Challenging intellectual and creative work is central to student learning and collegiate quality. Colleges and universities promote student learning by challenging and supporting them to engage in various forms of deep learning. Four Engagement Indicators are part of this theme: Higher-Order Learning, Reflective & Integrative Learning, Learning Strategies, and Quantitative Reasoning. Campus Environment Students benefit and are more satisfied in supportive settings that cultivate positive relationships among students, faculty, and staff. Two Engagement Indicators investigate this theme: Quality of Interactions and Supportive Environment. Learning with Peers Collaborating with others in mastering difficult material and developing interpersonal and social competence prepare students to deal with complex, unscripted problems they will encounter during and after college. Two Engagement Indicators make up this theme: Collaborative Learning and Discussions with Diverse Others. Experiences with Faculty Students learn firsthand how experts think about and solve problems by interacting with faculty members inside and outside of instructional settings. As a result, faculty become role models, mentors, and guides for lifelong learning. In addition, effective teaching requires that faculty deliver material and provide feedback in student-centered ways. Two Engagement Indicators investigate this theme: Student-Faculty Interaction and Effective Teaching Practices. Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness

4 Themes for Student Engagement Indicators Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness Academic Challenge Higher-Order Learning Reflective & Integrative Learning Learning Strategies Quantitative Reasoning Time Spent Preparing for Class Reading & WritingChallenging Courses Learning with Peers Collaborative Learning Discussions with Diverse Others Experiences with Faculty Student-Faculty Interaction Effective Teaching Practices Campus Environment Quality of Interactions Supportive Environment

First YearSenior Academic Challenge UTPA Score Compared with… UTPA Score Compared with … UT System Carnegie Class Baseline Peers UT System Carnegie Class Baseline Peers Higher-Order Learning Reflective & Integrative Learning Learning Strategies Quantitative Reasoning NSSE Themes 2013 Scores for UTPA 5 Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness  The Scale is 60 indicates the score of UTPA is significantly lower than this comparison group indicates the score of UTPA is significantly higher than this comparison group A blank box indicates no statistically significant difference    Carnegie Class = Master’s L Baseline Peers: California State University-Bakersfield California State University, San Bernardino CUNY Herbert H. Lehman College Stephen F. Austin State University Tennessee State University Texas A&M International University Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi Texas A&M University - Kingsville

First YearSenior Learning with Peers UTPA Score Compared with… UTPA Score Compared with … UT System Carnegie Class Baseline Peers UT System Carnegie Class Baseline Peers Collaborative Learning Discussions with Diverse Others NSSE Themes 2013 Scores for UTPA 6 Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness  The Scale is 60 indicates the score of UTPA is significantly lower than this comparison group indicates the score of UTPA is significantly higher than this comparison group A blank box indicates no statistically significant difference       Carnegie Class = Master’s L Baseline Peers: California State University-Bakersfield California State University, San Bernardino CUNY Herbert H. Lehman College Stephen F. Austin State University Tennessee State University Texas A&M International University Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi Texas A&M University - Kingsville

First YearSenior Experiences with Faculty UTPA Score Compared with… UTPA Score Compared with … UT System Carnegie Class Baseline Peers UT System Carnegie Class Baseline Peers Student-Faculty Interaction Effective Teaching Practices NSSE Themes 2013 Scores for UTPA 7 Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness The Scale is 60 indicates the score of UTPA is significantly lower than this comparison group indicates the score of UTPA is significantly higher than this comparison group A blank box indicates no statistically significant difference  Carnegie Class = Master’s L Baseline Peers: California State University-Bakersfield California State University, San Bernardino CUNY Herbert H. Lehman College Stephen F. Austin State University Tennessee State University Texas A&M International University Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi Texas A&M University - Kingsville

First YearSenior Campus Environment UTPA Score Compared with… UTPA Score Compared with … UT System Carnegie Class Baseline Peers UT System Carnegie Class Baseline Peers Quality of Interactions Supportive Environment NSSE Themes 2013 Scores for UTPA 8 Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness The Scale is 60 indicates the score of UTPA is significantly lower than this comparison group indicates the score of UTPA is significantly higher than this comparison group A blank box indicates no statistically significant difference   Carnegie Class = Master’s L Baseline Peers: California State University-Bakersfield California State University, San Bernardino CUNY Herbert H. Lehman College Stephen F. Austin State University Tennessee State University Texas A&M International University Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi Texas A&M University - Kingsville

NSSE Themes 2013 Scores for UTPA 9 Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness Academic Challenge: Additional Results Average Hours per Week Preparing for Class Percentage Responding “Very much” or “Quite a bit”

NSSE Themes 2013 Scores for UTPA 10 Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness Academic Challenge: Additional Results Reading & Writing Average Hours per Week On Course Reading Average Hours per Week Assigned Writing

Highest Performing Areas 2013 Percent of students who responded… UTPA UT System Carnegie Class Baseline Peers 5d. Instructors… Provided feedback on a draft or work in progress (Quite a bit or Very much) 73%60%68%72% 12. About how many… courses have included a community-based project (service-learning)? (Some, Most, or All) 58%49%53%61% 5e. Instructors… Provided prompt and detailed feedback on tests or completed assignments (Quite a bit, Very much) 67%57%66%67% 4e. Forming a new idea or understanding from various pieces of information (Quite a bit, Very much) 76%68%70%73% 4d. Evaluating a point of view, decision, or information source (Quite a bit, Very much) 78%70%72% 14i. Institution emphasizes… Attending events that address important social, economic, or political issues (Quite a bit, Very much) 54%42%45%43% 12. About how many… courses have included a community-based project (service-learning)? (Some, Most, or All) 67%56%62%65% 3b. Worked with a faculty member on activities other than coursework (…) (Often, Very often) 31%21%24%26% 14g. Institution emphasizes… Helping you manage your non- academic responsibilities (…) (Quite a bit, Very much) 40%31%33% 3d. Discussed your academic performance with a faculty member (Often, Very often) 37%28%33%36% First Year Students Seniors Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness

Lowest Performing Areas 2013 Percent of students who responded… UTPA UT System Carnegie Class Baseline Peers 1e. Asked another student to help you understand course material (Often, Very often) 42%50%44%49% 8c. Discussions with… People with religious beliefs other than your own (Often, Very often) 57%67% 66% 8d. Discussions with… People with political views other than your own (Often, Very often) 56%68%69%65% 8b. Discussions with… People from an economic background other than your own (Often, Very often) 54%70%73%70% 8a. Discussions with… People of a race or ethnicity other than your own (Often, Very often) 53%71% 72% 9b. Reviewed your notes after class (Often, Very often) 66%70%67%72% 8c. Discussions with… People with religious beliefs other than your own (Often, Very often) 61%72%68%72% 8d. Discussions with… People with political views other than your own (Often, Very often) 59%72%71% 8b. Discussions with… People from an economic background other than your own (Often, Very often) 61%75%74%75% 8a. Discussions with… People of a race or ethnicity other than your own (Often, Very often) 52%77%72%77% First Year Students Seniors Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness

2013 Student Assessment of Experience at UTPA Students reported how much their experience at UTPA contributed to their knowledge, skills, and personal development in ten areas. Percentages are of those Seniors responding “Very much” or “Quite a bit.”

2013 Student Assessment of Experience at UTPA Satisfaction with UTPA Percentage rating their overall experience as “Excellent” or “Good” Percentage who would “Definitely” or “Probably” attend this institution again

Recommendations Engagement Indicators in need of attention Academic Challenge: Learning Strategies (Seniors) Encourage faculty to have students : Identify key information from reading assignments Review notes after class Summarize what they learn in class or from course materials Learning with Peers: Discussions with Diverse Others Consider initiatives that aid in recruiting students from backgrounds other than those most common in the Rio Grande Valley Region (i.e., ethnic, economic, religious and political backgrounds) Consider initiating more student activities that encourage diverse groups of students to engage one another and learn about their similarities/differences in a positive manner Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness

Recommendations Engagement Indicators to be celebrated Academic Challenge: Higher Order Learning (First Year Students) Continue to emphasize the following in assigned coursework: Applying facts, theories, or methods to practical problems or new situations Analyzing an idea, experience, or line of reasoning in depth by examining its parts Evaluating a point of view, decision, or information source Forming a new idea or understanding from various pieces of information Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness

Recommendations Engagement Indicators to be celebrated Learning with Peers: Collaborative Learning (Seniors) Continue to encourage the following practices amongst students: Assisting each other with assigned coursework Preparing for exams in groups with peers Working in groups on course projects or assignments Experience with Faculty: Student-Faculty Interaction (Seniors) Encourage faculty to continue to do the following with students: Discuss career plans/opportunities Work on activities other than coursework (i.e., committees, student groups) Discuss course topics, ideas, or concepts with students outside of class Discuss student’s academic performance Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness

Recommendations Engagement Indicators to be celebrated Campus Environment: Supportive Environment (Seniors) Continue to emphasize: Availability of learning support services that promote academic success (i.e., tutoring services, writing center) Social opportunities and, especially, opportunities for contact among students from different backgrounds (i.e., social, racial/ethnic, religious) Availability of support for overall well-being of students (i.e., recreation, health care, counseling) and services that can teach them about how to best manage non- academic responsibilities (i.e., work, family) Advantages to attending campus activities and events (i.e., performing arts, athletics events) as well as to attending events that address important social, economic, or political issues Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness

Questions & Discussion Contact Information: Liana Ryan This presentation is online at: E044000E7F4F739C E044000E7F4F739C Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness