Results of AUC’s NSSE Administration in 2011 Office of Institutional Research February 9, 2012

What We’ll Talk About What is Student Engagement and Why Do We Measure It? NSSE Background Survey Administration Selected AUC Results –Satisfaction –What We Do Well –What Needs Work Directions for Action

What is Student Engagement? What students do -- time and energy devoted to studies and other educationally purposeful activities –Research shows this is the single best predictor of their learning and personal development. What institutions do -- using resources and effective educational practices to induce students to do the right things Educationally effective institutions channel student energy toward the right activities

NSSE Background Designed to assess the extent to which students are engaged in effective educational practices and what they gain from their college experiences. Main content represents student behaviors highly correlated with many desirable learning and personal development outcomes of college.

NSSE Background More than 2,395,000 students from over 1,400 colleges and universities have participated to date. Institution types, sizes, and locations represented in NSSE are largely representative of U.S. baccalaureate institutions.

Survey Administration All first-year and senior students with working addresses in the student information system. Administration in spring term Web-based Multiple follow-ups to increase response rates

NSSE 2011 Survey Population and Response Almost two million first-year and senior students from 751 institutions were invited to participate in the 2011 NSSE administration. Of this survey population, 537,605 students responded. At AUC, 1,690 First-Years and 656 Seniors were invited to participate.

NSSE 2011 Response Rates AUC’s response rate = 34% –FY = 32%, SR = 39% –FY = 539 respondents, SR = 257 respondents Comparison Groups: –Basic Carnegie Class = 27% –Middle East/Asia = 44% –All NSSE 2011 = 28%

Comparison Groups Basic Carnegie Class (MA, Large): 165 Middle East/Asia: 8 –American University of Afghanistan –American University of Sharjah –Carnegie Mellon, Qatar Campus –Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar –Lebanese American University –Northwestern University in Qatar –Texas A&M University at Qatar –Virginia Commonwealth University in Qatar All NSSE 2010 Institutions: 751

SELECTED AUC RESULTS

Demographics of AUC Respondents in 2011 % Full-time: Gender: % Residence On Campus: % International:

Satisfaction -- Evaluation of Entire Educational Experience 88% of first-years and seniors reported that their entire educational experience at AUC was good or excellent. –No significant differences from Carnegie and NSSE peers.

Satisfaction -- Percent Would Go To Same Institution Again, If Starting Over 85% of first-years and 84% of seniors would go to AUC, if they could start over again. –No significant differences from comparison group peers.

Benchmarks of Effective Educational Practice Comparison Groups Class AUC Carnegie Class Peers Middle East/Asia NSSE 2011 Level of Academic Challenge (LAC) How challenging is your institution's intellectual and creative work? First-Year Senior 59 − Active and Collaborative Learning (ACL) Are your students actively involved in their learning, individually and working with others? First-Year Senior Student-Faculty Interaction (SFI) Do your students work with faculty members inside and outside the classroom? First-Year Senior 43 Enriching Educational Experiences (EEE) Do your students take advantage of complementary learning opportunities? First-Year 27 + Senior Supportive Campus Environment (SCE) Do your students feel the institution is committed to their success? First-Year 57−−− Senior 59 A '+' symbol score is higher than comparison group and a '-' symbol indicates a lower score (p <.05). A blank space indicates no significant difference.

Level of Academic Challenge AUC first-years and seniors report coursework emphasized memorization less often than all comparison groups. AUC first-years and senior report coursework emphasized analyzing data, synthesizing and organizing ideas, and making judgments at rates not significantly different than comparison groups.

Level of Academic Challenge Needs work: AUC first-years and seniors report coursework emphasized applying theory to practice less often than Carnegie Class and NSSE peers. * Level of significance

Level of Academic Challenge AUC first-years and seniors report writing more papers or reports of lengths from fewer than 5 pages to more than 20 pages than peers in comparison groups. AUC first-years report reading slightly more on their own than peers. Needs attention: First-years report slightly fewer overall reading assignments than peers.

Active and Collaborative Learning * Level of significance First-years and seniors report significantly higher involvement in activities that contribute to active and collaborative learning than Carnegie Class peers.

Student-Faculty Interaction * Level of significance Areas of strength:

Student-Faculty Interaction * Level of significance Areas needing improvement:

Enriching Educational Experiences * Level of significance Areas of strength: AUC seniors report participating in these experiences at significantly higher levels than all comparison groups.

Enriching Educational Experiences * Level of significance Areas of strength:

Enriching Educational Experiences * Level of significance Areas of strength:

Enriching Educational Experiences * Level of significance Areas needing improvement:

Supportive Campus Environment First-year students report less satisfaction than all comparison groups with items related to the university’s commitment to their success. Areas needing improvement : * Level of significance

Supportive Campus Environment Areas needing improvement : * Level of significance

Supportive Campus Environment Areas needing improvement : * Level of significance

Student Comments:

Directions for Action Examine, share, and use results to make improvements. –What are areas of interest? –Who needs to be involved? What are AUC’s priorities? In addition to comparison with peers, what should our absolute targets/benchmarks be? Tie results to: –University outcomes –MSCHE standards –Standards of professional accrediting bodies –AUC’s strategic goals

Directions for Action First-Years: –Encourage faculty to assign more reading material –Improve support provided in the first year to set the stage for academic and social success. –Expand encounters with racial, religious, political, ethnic, etc. diversity in first-year courses

Directions for Action Both first-years and seniors: –Increase opportunities for applying theory in courses –Increase opportunities for student-faculty interaction –Stress to faculty the importance of prompt feedback on assignments –Improve academic advising and increase faculty mentoring –Increase opportunities for interaction with different, diverse groups –Work with faculty and staff to stress the importance of availability and a student-centered service culture

Examples of Using NSSE Data University of Tennessee: Hired FT academic advisors to provide more assistance to students, improved orientation to give students more one-one-one advising time. UNLV: Hired more academic advisors, required advising for freshman and transfers, created Academic Success Center to consolidate and enhance academic support services. Illinois State U: Uses NSSE data as input to solution-based programming. Univ. of Akron: Used NSSE results to create more exposure to diversity in FY and gen-ed courses; more professional development for faculty and admin. who work with FY students; better ways of communicating with FY students, etc.

Assessment Committee is reviewing and analyzing results. Detailed reports are available on OIR website: SS/Pages/NSSE.aspx SS/Pages/NSSE.aspx Reports by major grouping are available with the Deans and Associate Deans. For more information or analysis, contact OIR at