NSSE 2014: Accolades and Action Items Faculty Senate Nov. 20, 2014 Patrick Barlow, Ph.D., Assessment Coordinator

Accolades Administered to First Year (828) and Senior Students (674) Survey had 3 major sections: Standard items (87), Standard Demographics (22) UW Consortium (23), Experiences with Writing Module (13) 3 Comparison Groups: UW system peers (8), Carnegie Class (264), entire 13/14 NSSE group (983) Accolades: Access to High Impact Practices Supportive campus environment Improvement in Engagement Indicators FY to SR year Improvement in Writing Experiences Overall Satisfaction and Desire to Return.

Engagement Indicators: FY

HIPs 62% of FY students experience at least one HIP (primarily service learning) 96% of SR students experience at least one HIP.

HIPs

Campus support: FY

Campus Support: SR

Satisfaction & Desire to Return

Experiences with Writing: First Year Most Common to Least Common Writing Tasks: First Year (based on frequency count of Most or All assignments) Assignments/Student Behaviors % 1 Analyzed or evaluated something you read, researched, or observed 56 2 Received feedback from a classmate, friend, or family member about a draft before turning in your final assignment 49 3 Summarized material you read, such as articles, books, or online publications 46 4 Argued a position using evidence and reasoning 42 5 Gave Feedback to a classmate about a draft for outline 39 6 Addressed a real or imagined audience 35 7 Talked with a classmate, family member, friend to develop your ideas before starting assignment 33 8 Wrote in the style and format of a specific field 30 9 Described your methods or findings related to data you collected Explained in writing the meaning of numerical or statistical data 17 Instructor Behaviors 1Provided clear instructions describing what she or he wanted you to do 83 2Explained in advance the criteria used to grade your assignment 78 3Explained in advance what he or she wanted you to learn 61

Experiences with Writing: Seniors Most Common to Least Common Writing Tasks: Seniors (based on frequency count of Most or All assignments) Assignments/Student Behaviors % 1Analyzed or evaluated something you read, researched, or observed 70 2Wrote in the style and format of a specific field 62 3Summarized material you read, such as articles, books, or online publications 56 4Argued a position using evidence and reasoning 48 5Described your methods or findings related to data you collected 40 6Addressed a real or imagined audience 39 7 Received feedback from a classmate, friend, or family member about a draft before turning in your final assignment 33 8 Talked with a classmate, family member, friend to develop your ideas before starting assignment 30 9Explained in writing the meaning of numerical or statistical data 29 10Gave Feedback to a classmate about a draft for outline 24 Instructor Behaviors 1Provided clear instructions describing what she or he wanted you to do 85 2Explained in advance the criteria used to grade your assignment 82 3Explained in advance what he or she wanted you to learn 64

Action Items Action Items: Low Engagement in Learning Strategies (SR&FY) Low Engagement in Diversity Experiences (SR&FY) Low Student Faculty Interaction (primarily FY) Concerns on Access to General Education Courses and Advising (FY) Writing Experiences: Nature of Tasks (FY) Addressing Personal Obstacles to Academic Progress (SR)

Learning Strategies (SR % shown) UW-L UW ComprehensivesCarnegie ClassNSSE 2013 & 2014 Mean Effect sizeMean Effect sizeMean Effect size Learning Strategies FY * *** *** -.13 Learning Strategies SR *** *** -.17 Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard deviation; Symbols on the Overview page are based on effect size and p before rounding.

Discussions with Diverse Others (SR % shown) UWL UW ComprehensivesCarnegie ClassNSSE 2013 & 2014 Mean Effect sizeMean Effect sizeMean Effect size Discussions with Diverse Others FY *** *** -.27 Discussions with Diverse Others SR *** *** -.31 Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard deviation; Symbols on the Overview page are based on effect size and p before rounding.

Student Faculty Interaction: FY Results UW-L Your first-year students compared with UW ComprehensivesCarnegie ClassNSSE 2013 & 2014 Engagement Indicator Mean Effect sizeMean Effect sizeMean Effect size Student-Faculty Interaction *** *** *** -.17 Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard deviation; Symbols on the Overview page are based on effect size and p before rounding.

Student Faculty Interaction: Senior Results UW-L Your senior students compared with UW ComprehensivesCarnegie ClassNSSE 2013 & 2014 Engagement Indicator Mean Effect sizeMean Effect sizeMean Effect size Student-Faculty Interaction * *** ***.15 Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard deviation; Symbols on the Overview page are based on effect size and p before rounding.

Barriers for Academic Progress: FY UW Consortium Item wording or description UW-L MeanUW Mean Effect size My advising interactions help me make better decisions about my academic goals (18% Disagree) 3.0 ▽ 3.1**-.13 How satisfied have you been with the availability of courses needed to fulfill general education requirements? (32% Dissatisfied) 2.7 ▽ 2.9***-.26 Difficulties getting the courses you need (45% minor, 27% mod, 10% major) 2.3 ▲ 2.0***.32 Lack of good academic advising (30% minor, 12% mod, 4% major) 1.7 △ 1.6**.13

Barriers to Academic Progress: SR Please rate the following as obstacles to your academic progress during the current academic year UW-LUW Comprehensives Effect size Lack of personal motivation (38 % Minor, 18 % Mod, 6% Major) 1.9 △ 1.8***.17 Poor academic performance (28% Minor, 9 % Mod, 3% Major) 1.6 △ 1.4***.20 Personal health issues, physical or mental (27% Minor, 16% Mod, 6% Major) 1.8 △ 1.6**.13

Writing Experiences: FY concerns First Year Responses to items on writing indicated concerns. UWL experience contributed to Writing clearly and effectively (below Carnegie and NSSE groups) Experiences with Writing Module indicated concerns: Analyzed or evaluated something you read, researched, or observed Described your methods or findings related to data you collected in lab or field work, a survey project, etc. Argued a position using evidence and reasoning Provided clear instructions describing what he or she wanted you to do Explained in advance what he or she wanted you to learn

Recommendations 1.For all students, engaging them in more academic and co- curricular activities that expose them to multiple perspectives and interactions across difference would help address some of the diversity concerns. 2.Finding paths for first year students to connect with faculty would be advantageous and would build on aspects of our Firm Footing project like Eagle Alert and the advising taskforce. 3.Ongoing review of our approaches to writing instruction and the nature of writing assignments appears warranted. This may be best started by looking at what is taking place in the first year. 4.Course access for lower division students as an obstacle to progress may prove to be a good area for review as we are already aware of some issues for access to science courses and the growing national interest on the need to monitor and report on graduation rates.

Response Rates First-year Senior UW-L UW Compreh ensives Carnegie Class NSSE 2013 & 2014 UW-L UW Compreh ensives Carnegie Class NSSE 2013 & 2014 Response rate35%25%22% 36%30%27%26% Sampling error b +/- 2.8%+/- 1.5%+/- 0.3%+/- 0.2% +/- 3%+/- 1.2%+/- 0.3%+/- 0.1% a. Comparison group response rate and sampling error were computed at the student level (i.e., they are not institution averages). b. Also called “margin of error,” sampling error is an estimate of the amount the true score on a given item could differ from the estimate based on a sample. For example, if the sampling error is +/- 5.0% and 40% of your students reply "Very often" to a particular item, then the true population value is most likely between 35% and 45%.

Representativeness: Race/Ethnicity First-year Senior Representativeness Respondent %Population % Respondent % Population % Female Full-time First-time, first-year 8579 N/A Race/ethnicity a Am. Indian or Alaska Native Asian Black or African American Hispanic or Latino Native Hawaiian/Other Pac. Isl White Other Foreign or nonresident alien Two or more races/ethicities Unknown 00 10

Representativeness: ACT First Year ACT scores Population Avg/SD= 24.37/2.93 Respondent Avg/SD=24.67/3.04 t (3144) = 2.45, p < (.01), Cohen’s d =.10 Senior ACT scores Population Avg/SD= 24.81/2.95 Respondent Avg/SD=25.03/2.98 t (2494) = 1.55, p > (.12)