Contexts for Thinking About Gateway Courses Teaching Seminar May 2009 Vice Provost for Academic Affairs

Contextual Frames Landscape of Higher Education: Access & Achievement A Look at NAU Freshmen NAU: Our Goals, Our Future How Are We Doing? The Challenge is an Opportunity

Higher Education: Access & Achievement From elite to mass participation Increased diversity of preparation, socioeconomic location, ethnicity/race, patterns of enrollment AZ: Increasing diversity and diminishing educational attainment Students: Maturational context and cohort effects  maturity, skills, experiences, insight about self & learning, expectations, aspirations

Expectations of Public Institutions in the Era of Accountability Our task is not to “weed out”, but to enable students to achieve learning and degree goals Quality not defined by rates of attrition/failure, but by rates of success Stewardship of resources  external stakeholders expect us to be efficient; we want to advance our institutional goals

A Look at NAU Freshmen Predominantly full-time, residential, traditional aged, farther from home than is typical As well or better prepared academically than students at comparable public universities About 1/3 are first generation and are increasingly diverse Have high aspirations Highly confident in academic abilities Some inferences: lack insight about learning process, not especially inquisitive or inclined to critical thinking, risk averse

NAU: Our Goals, Our Future We can expect to serve more first generation, and increasingly diverse learners Governor, legislature and ABOR have staked out ambitious goals for college degree attainment Our #1 Strategic Goal: Be a learning-centered university with a deep commitment to student success and high expectations for student achievement. We strive to prepare students for the challenging world of the future We are growing in an environment of high expectations and resource constraints

How Are We Doing? Attention to and investment in undergraduate education over last several years has produced gains in retention (nearly 72% two years ago, 69% last year, looks promising for this year) Research suggests that the most important variable (post-admission) affecting persistence is academic success in the first year We have a number of courses that have consistently high rates of attrition and failure “gateway courses” – Gateways to degree attainment – Gateways to particular academic paths

How Are We Doing? Data also evidence variation in DFW rates by course section among gateway & non- gateway courses – instructional design/pedagogy? – selection effects? My take: stronger evidence for instructional design effects than for selection effects Course redesign, course linked academic support, & course coordination have reduced mean and variability in DFW rates We have some evidence that the most prevalent instructional design in LD courses is lecture

The Challenge is an Opportunity To enhance NAU’s reputation—be a leader in promoting high rates of success and achievement among diverse learners To become more effective so as to free up resources for other institutional goals To succeed in pursuit of ambitious goals for undergraduate education, research, and graduate education To better position faculty to achieve their goals

WHAT IF? We became scholars of our most substantial enterprise  undergraduate education? We found ways to promote student achievement while at the same time enabling faculty to better balance multiple commitments to teaching and scholarship? We inverted the typical paradigms that shape our approach to undergraduate? We stopped thinking that “large” classes are a lost cause? We really shifted the focus of instructional design from us to them? We demanded of ourselves the same degree of credible evidence in relation to teaching & learning as we do in our scholarly work?