Presentation to Student Affairs Directors November, 2010 Marcia Belcheir, Ph.D. Institutional Analysis, Assessment, & Reporting.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Gary Whisenand Director, Institutional Research August 26, 2011.
Advertisements

Gallaudet Institutional Research Report: Annual Campus Climate Survey: 2010 Pat Hulsebosch: Executive Director – Office of Academic Quality Faculty Senate.
Prepared by: Fawn Skarsten Director Institutional Analysis.
National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) Comparisons of the survey results for UPRM Office of Institutional Research and Planning University of Puerto.
Using the 2005 National Survey of Student Engagement in Student Affairs Indiana State University.
You will be familiar with the five NSSE benchmarks and the survey items that make up each benchmark. You will be familiar with the comparison groups.
DATA UPDATES FACULTY PRESENTATION September 2009.
Student Engagement In Good Educational Practices Findings From the 2004 and 2007 National Surveys of Student Engagement Cathy Sanders Director of Assessment.
2012 National Survey of Student Engagement Jeremy D. Penn & John D. Hathcoat.
First Year & Senior Student Experiences The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) 2011 Office of Institutional Research and Policy Studies.
GGC and Student Engagement.  NSSE  Overall: 32%  First Year: 30%  Seniors: 33%  GGC  Overall: 28%  First Year: 26% (381)  Seniors: 38% (120)
NSSE When?Spring, 2008 Who?Freshmen and Seniors random sample How?Electronic and Snail mail follow up Respondents?30% response rate 26% freshmen.
Mind the Gap: Overview of FSSE and BCSSE Jillian Kinzie NSSE.
Urban Universities: Student Characteristics and Engagement Donna Hawley Martha Shawver.
Benchmarking Effective Educational Practice Community Colleges of the State University of New York April, 2005.
National Survey of Student Engagement University of Minnesota, Morris NSSE 2002.
National Survey of Student Engagement University of Minnesota, Morris NSSE 2004.
BENCHMARKING EFFECTIVE EDUCATIONAL PRACTICE IN COMMUNITY COLLEGES What We’re Learning. What Lies Ahead.
National Survey of Student Engagement, 2008 Results for UBC-Okanagan.
Derek Herrmann & Ryan Smith University Assessment Services.
Results of AUC’s NSSE Administration in 2011 Office of Institutional Research February 9, 2012.
Community College Survey of Student Engagement CCSSE 2014.
NSSE – Results & Connections Institutional Research & Academic Resources California State Polytechnic University, Pomona October 2, 2013 – Academic Senate.
Selected Results of NSSE 2003: University of Kentucky December 3, 2003.
National Survey of Student Engagement 2006 Marcia Belcheir Institutional Analysis, Assessment & Reporting.
IUPUI Council on Retention and Graduation – October 13, 2005 National Survey of Student Engagement Understanding IUPUI Students: National Survey of Student.
Student Engagement at Northeastern Illinois Analysis and Use of the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) 2009.
CCSSE 2013 Findings for Cuesta College San Luis Obispo County Community College District.
 Assessing Student Engagement.  1. Amount of time/effort students put into their studies and other educationally purposeful activities  2. How institutional.
Note: CCSSE survey items included in benchmarks are listed at the end of this presentation 1. Active and Collaborative Learning Students learn more when.
2009 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) Report Institutional Research & Information November 18, 2009.
Student Engagement: 2008 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) Office of Institutional Research and Planning Presentation to Senate November 2008.
NSSE 2005: Student Perceptions of Enriching Educational Experiences Kathryn Doherty, Ed.D. January 18, 2006.
National Survey of Student Engagement, 2008 Results for UBC-Vancouver.
Gallaudet Institutional Research Report: National Survey of Student Engagement Pat Hulsebosch: Executive Director – Office of Academic Quality Faculty.
APSU 2009 National Survey of Student Engagement Patricia Mulkeen Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness.
2009 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) Report Institutional Research & Information November 18, 2009.
Assessing SAGES with NSSE data Office of Institutional Research September 25 th, 2007.
National Survey of Student Engagement 2009 Missouri Valley College January 6, 2010.
CCSSE 2010: SVC Benchmark Data Note: Benchmark survey items are listed in the Appendix (slides 9-14)
BEAMS – Using NSSE Data: Understanding the Benchmark Reports.
NATIONAL SURVEY OF STUDENT ENGAGEMENT AT IU KOKOMO Administrative Council 26 September 2007.
NSSE 2005 CSUMB Report California State University at Monterey Bay Office of Institutional Effectiveness Office of Assessment and Research.
Looking Inside The “Oakland Experience” Another way to look at NSSE Data April 20, 2009.
SASSE South African Survey of Student Engagement Studente Ontwikkeling en Sukses Student Development and Success UNIVERSITEIT VAN DIE VRYSTAAT UNIVERSITY.
Student Engagement as Policy Direction: Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE) Skagit Valley College Board of Trustees Policy GP-4 – Education.
De Anza College 2009 Community College Survey of Student Engagement Presented to the Academic Senate February 28, 2011 Prepared by Mallory Newell Institutional.
Highlights of NSSE 2001: University of Kentucky December 10, 2001.
Student Engagement and Academic Performance: Identifying Effective Practices to Improve Student Success Shuqi Wu Leeward Community College Hawaii Strategy.
National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) Comparison on the survey results at UPRM with peers Office of Institutional Research and Planning University.
Jennifer Ballard George Kuh September 19, Overview  NSSE and the Concept of Student Engagement  Select Linfield results:  NSSE 2011  Brief explanation.
NSSE Working Student Study Assessment Day Presentation Office of Assessment Fitchburg State College.
1 NSSE Results Fort Lewis College (2010) Richard A. Miller Exec. Dir – OIRPA.
UNDERSTANDING 2012 NATIONAL SURVEY OF STUDENT ENGAGEMENT (NSSE) RESULTS Nicholls State University October 17, 2012.
GGC and Student Engagement.  NSSE  Overall: 27% (down 5%)  First Year: 25% (down 5%)  Seniors: 28% (down 5%)  GGC  Overall: 35% (up 7%)  First.
 NSSE Results Austin Peay State University.
The University of Texas-Pan American National Survey of Student Engagement 2005 Results & Recommendations Presented by: November, 2005 S. J. Sethi, Ph.D.
Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness 1 The University of Texas-Pan American National Survey of Student Engagement 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006.
The University of Texas-Pan American Susan Griffith, Ph.D. Executive Director National Survey of Student Engagement 2003 Results & Recommendations Presented.
National Survey of Student Engagement Executive Snapshot 2007.
Faculty Senate Pat Hulsebosch, Office of Academic Quality 11/17/08.
The University of Texas-Pan American
Dissertation Findings
NSSE Results for Faculty
The University of Texas-Pan American
The University of Texas-Pan American
Director, Institutional Research
GGC and Student Engagement
Faculty In-Service Week
2013 NSSE Results.
Presentation transcript:

Presentation to Student Affairs Directors November, 2010 Marcia Belcheir, Ph.D. Institutional Analysis, Assessment, & Reporting

 NSSE benchmark changes across time for freshmen and seniors  NSSE benchmark differences for 2010 depending on residential housing option  NSSE benchmark differences for 2010 depending on age group  Demographic information gathered on the NSSE

 Level of Academic Challenge (LAC)  Active and Collaborative Learning (ACL)  Student-Faculty Interactions (SFI)  Enriching Educational Experiences (EEE)  Supportive Campus Environment (SCE)

 Hours spent preparing for class  Number of assigned textbooks  Number of written papers  Extent coursework emphasizes (a) analysis, (b) synthesis, (c) making judgments about value of information, (d) applying theories or concepts  Working harder than you thought you could to meet an instructor’s standards  Campus environment emphasizes spending significant amount of time studying and on academic work

 No differences based on where students reside (Living-learning community, apartment, other residential housing, or off- campus)  No differences based on age group

 Asked questions in class or contributed to discussions  Made a class presentation  Work with other students on project (a) during class and (b) outside of class  Tutored or taught other students  Participated in a community-based project as part of a course  Discussed ideas from readings with others outside of class

 Significant differences based on housing choice with students in apartments reporting significantly more ACL compared to all other groups (Living-learning community, other residential housing, off-campus)  No differences based on age group

 Discussed grades or assignments with an instructor  Talked about career plans with faculty member or advisor  Discussed ideas from reading with faculty outside of class  Worked with faculty on activities other than coursework  Received prompt feedback on academic performance  Worked on research project with faculty outside of course or program requirements

 Significant differences based on housing choice with those in apartments and living- learning communities reporting more interactions  No significant differences based on age group

 Hours spent participating in co-curricular activities  Practicum, internship, field experience, co-op experience, or clinical assignment  Community service or volunteer work  Foreign language coursework and study abroad  Independent study or self-designed major  Culminating senior experience  Serious conversations with students of different beliefs, opinions and values  Serious conversations with students of different race or ethnicity  Using electronic medium to discuss or complete assignment  Campus environment encourages contact among students from different economic, social and racial or ethnic backgrounds  Participate in a learning community or some other formal program where groups of students take two or more classes together

 Significant differences based on housing choice with those in apartments and living-learning communities reporting more enriching educational experiences compared to other residence hall choices and off-campus  Significant differences also found based on age. Youngest students (19 or younger) had lowest EEE scores compared to all other age groups. Students aged had highest scores compared to all other groups. Other age groups (30-39, 40-55, 24-29, over 55) had similar scores.

 Campus environment provide support you need to help you succeed academically  Campus environment helps you cope with your non-academic responsibilities  Campus environment provides the support you need to thrive socially  Quality of relationships with other students  Quality of relationships with faculty members  Quality of relationships with administrative personnel and offices

 Students in living-learning communities reported much higher scores compared to all other housing groups  Students over 55 reported higher SCE scores compared to all other age groups.

 How time is spent  Parents’ educational levels  Barriers to graduating on time