GGC and Student Engagement.  NSSE  Overall: 27% (down 5%)  First Year: 25% (down 5%)  Seniors: 28% (down 5%)  GGC  Overall: 35% (up 7%)  First.

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.
Indiana State University Assessment of General Education Objectives Using Indicators From National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)
Gallaudet University Results on National Survey of Student Engagement Office of Institutional Research August, 2007.
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.
National Survey of Student Engagement Department of Institutional Research and Planning December 2006.
GGC and Student Engagement.  NSSE  Overall: 32%  First Year: 30%  Seniors: 33%  GGC  Overall: 28%  First Year: 26% (381)  Seniors: 38% (120)
Presentation to Student Affairs Directors November, 2010 Marcia Belcheir, Ph.D. Institutional Analysis, Assessment, & Reporting.
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.
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 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.
Selected Results of NSSE 2003: University of Kentucky December 3, 2003.
1 N ational S urvey & F aculty S urvey of S tudent E ngagement (NSSE) & (FSSE) 2006 Wayne State University.
Student Engagement at Towson: NSSE 2005 Telling and Selling the Story Kathryn Doherty, Ed.D. January 11, 2006.
National Survey of Student Engagement 2006 Marcia Belcheir Institutional Analysis, Assessment & Reporting.
An Introduction: NSSE and the Concept of Student Engagement.
CCSSE 2013 Findings for Cuesta College San Luis Obispo County Community College District.
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.
Topic #4 - EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING Evidence: PowerPoint of Key Evidence Produced by AC Office of Outcomes Assessments 1.
Assessing SAGES with NSSE data Office of Institutional Research September 25 th, 2007.
ESU’s NSSE 2013 Overview Joann Stryker Office of Institutional Research and Assessment University Senate, March 2014.
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)
National Survey of Student Engagement 2007 Results for Students in Graduate and Professional Studies.
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.
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.
 NSSE Results Austin Peay State University.
Today’s Topic Student Satisfaction and Engagement Hosted by IEPR.
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.
The University of Texas-Pan American National Survey of Student Engagement 2013 Presented by: November 2013 Office of Institutional Research & Effectiveness.
The University of Texas-Pan American National Survey of Student Engagement 2014 Presented by: October 2014 Office of Institutional Research & Effectiveness.
Faculty Senate Pat Hulsebosch, Office of Academic Quality 11/17/08.
The University of Texas-Pan American
NSSE 2004 (National Survey of Student Engagement)
UTRGV 2016 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)
The University of Texas-Pan American
UTRGV 2018 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)
The University of Texas-Pan American
UTRGV 2017 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)
GGC and Student Engagement
Faculty In-Service Week
2013 NSSE Results.
Presentation transcript:

GGC and Student Engagement

 NSSE  Overall: 27% (down 5%)  First Year: 25% (down 5%)  Seniors: 28% (down 5%)  GGC  Overall: 35% (up 7%)  First Year: 33% (900) (up 5%)  Seniors: 49% (198) (up 11%)

GGC Population (Fall 10) GGC Sample (Spring 11) NSSE Sample (Spring 11) FYSRFYSR Full Time73%82%65%95%84% Female54%63%66%65%63% Traditional (18-23)67%84%22%92%65%

 “Colleges and universities promote high levels of student achievement by emphasizing the importance of academic effort and setting high expectations for student performance.”  Benchmark is computed from items assessing hours spent in academic work, quantity of reading and writing, coursework and campus emphasis

GGCGeorgia SystemCarnegie ClassNSSE 2011 NSSE 2011 Top 50% NSSE 2011 Top 10% ClassMean a MeanSig Effect SizeMeanSig Effect SizeMeanSig b Effect SizeMeanSig Effect size MeanSig Effect size First-Year * *** *** ***-.69 Senior *** ***-.54

First-YearSenior Level of Academic Challenge (LAC)

GGCCarnegie ClassNSSE 2011 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year ***-.12 Senior GGCCarnegie ClassNSSE 2010 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year *** Senior ** GGCCarnegie BasicNSSE 2009 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year Senior GGCCarnegie ClassNSSE 2008 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year Senior

Level of Academic ChallengeGGCNSSEGGCNSSEGGCNSSEGGCNSSE To what degree is studying and spending time on academic work emphasized? % of FY students feel that this institution places substantial emphasis on academics Do faculty hold students to high standards? % of FY students frequently work harder than they thought they could to meet faculty expectations How much time do students spend on homework each week? % of FY students spend more than 15 hours per week preparing for class. % spend 5 hours or less What types of thinking do assignments require? First-year students report substantial emphasis on the following activities: Memorizing facts, ideas, or methods: Analyzing basic elements of an idea or theory: Synthesizing and organizing ideas: Making judgments about value of information: Applying theories or concepts: How much writing is expected? % of FY students write more than 10 papers between 5 and 19 pages and % have written a paper more than 20 pages in length How much reading is expected during the school year? % of FY students read more than 10 assigned books and packs of course readings. % read fewer than Do exams require students to do their best work? % of FY students report that their exams strongly challenge them to do their best work

First Year StudentsSeniors

 “Students learn more when they are intensely involved in their education and asked to think about what they are learning in different settings. Collaborating with others in solving problems or mastering difficult material prepares students for the messy, unscripted problems they will encounter daily during and after college.”  Benchmark is computed from items assessing frequency of engagement in activities focused on academic material that require interaction with classmates and others both in and out of class.

GGCGeorgia SystemCarnegie ClassNSSE 2011 NSSE 2011 Top 50% NSSE 2011 Top 10% ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect size c Mean a Sig b Effect size c First-Year *** *** *** ***-.24 Senior *** * *** **-.20

Active and Collaborative Learning (ACL)

GGCCarnegie ClassNSSE 2011 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year *** ***.28 Senior * ***.30 GGCCarnegie ClassNSSE 2010 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year * ***.26 Senior ** ***.37 GGCCarnegie BasicNSSE 2009 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year *** ***.49 Senior *** ***.56 GGCCarnegie ClassNSSE 2008 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year *** ***.55 Senior *.35

Active and Collaborative LearningGGCNSSEGGCNSSEGGCNSSEGGCNSSE How often are topics from class discussed outside of the classroom? % of FY students frequently discuss readings or ideas from coursework outside of class Do students work together on projects – inside and outside of class? % of FY students frequently work with other students on projects in class, % work with peers on assignments outside of class How often do students make class presentations? % of FY students report that they make frequent presentations in class How many students participate in community-based projects in regular courses? % of FY students frequently participate in service-learning or community- based projects during a given year. % never took part in such activities How many students apply their classroom learning to real life through internships or off-campus field experiences? By their senior year, % of students have participated in some form of practicum, internship, field experience, co-op, or clinical assignment Do students have opportunities to tutor or teach other students? % of seniors frequently assist their fellow students by tutoring or teaching them

First Year StudentsSeniors

 “Students learn firsthand how experts think about and solve practical problems by interacting with faculty members inside and outside the classroom. As a result, their teachers become role models, mentors, and guides for continuous, life-long learning.”  Benchmark is computed from items assessing the frequency of one-on-one interactions with faculty both in and out of class

GGCGeorgia SystemCarnegie ClassNSSE 2011 NSSE 2011 Top 50% NSSE 2011 Top 10% ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effec t Size c Mean a Sig b Effect size c Mean a Sig b Effect size c First-Year *** *** *** ***-.19 Senior *** ***-.53

First-YearSenior Student-Faculty Interaction (SFI)

GGCCarnegie ClassNSSE 2011 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year *** ***.28 Senior GGCCarnegie ClassNSSE 2010 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year ** ***.29 Senior *.20 GGCCarnegie BasicNSSE 2009 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year *** ***.50 Senior **.28 GGCCarnegie ClassNSSE 2008 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year *** ***.60 Senior **.44

Student-Faculty InteractionGGCNSSEGGCNSSEGGCNSSEGGCNSSE Are faculty members accessible and supportive? % of FY students say their faculty are available, helpful and sympathetic How many students work on research projects with faculty? By their senior year, % of students have done research with a faculty member Do students receive prompt feedback on academic performance? % of FY students indicate that they frequently get prompt verbal or written feedback from faculty members How often do students talk with advisors or faculty members about their career plans? % of seniors at least occasionally discuss career plans with faculty. 4 % never talk with faculty members about career plans Do students and faculty members work together on committees and projects outside of course work? % of FY students at least occasionally spend time with faculty members on activities other than coursework

First Year StudentsSeniors

 “Complementary learning opportunities enhance academic programs. Diversity experiences teach students valuable things about themselves and others. Technology facilitates collaboration between peers and instructors. Internships, community service, and senior capstone courses provide opportunities to integrate and apply knowledge.”  Benchmark is computed from items assessing frequency of engagement in a variety of co-curricular and experiential development opportunities.

GGCGeorgia SystemCarnegie ClassNSSE 2011 NSSE 2011 Top 50% NSSE 2011 Top 10% ClassMean a Sig b Effec t Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effec t Size c Mean a Sig b Effect size c Mean a Sig b Effect size c First-Year *** ** *** ***-.52 Senior *** *** *** *** ***-1.23

Enriching Educational Experiences (EEE)

GGCCarnegie ClassNSSE 2011 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year **-.09 Senior *** ***-.30 GGCCarnegie ClassNSSE 2010 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year *** Senior *** ***-.28 GGCCarnegie BasicNSSE 2009 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year *.16 Senior *** GGCCarnegie ClassNSSE 2008 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year *** **.33 Senior

Enriching Educational ExperiencesGGCNSSEGGCNSSEGGCNSSEGGCNSSE What types of honors courses, learning communities, and other distinctive programs are offered? During their first year, % of students participate in a learning community. By their senior year, % of students have taken an independent study class How often do students interact with peers with different social, political, or religious views? % of FY students say they frequently have serious conversations with students who are different from themselves in terms of their religious, political, or personal beliefs How often do students interact with peers from different racial or ethnic backgrounds? % of FY students frequently have serious conversations with those of a different race How many students study in other countries? By their senior year, % of students have studied abroad Do students participate in activities that enhance their spirituality? % of FY students frequently engage in spiritually enhancing activities such as worship, meditation, or prayer What percentage of students participate in community service? By the time they are seniors, % of students have participated in community service or volunteer work

First Year StudentsSeniors

 “Students perform better and are more satisfied at colleges that are committed to their success and cultivate positive working and social relations among different groups on campus.”  Benchmark is computed from items assessing perceived campus support and quality of relationships.

GGCGeorgia SystemCarnegie ClassNSSE 2011 NSSE 2011 Top 50% NSSE 2011 Top 10% ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effec t Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effec t size c Mean a Sig b Effec t size c First- Year * *** ***-.45 Senior *** ** ***-.27

First-YearSenior Supportive Campus Environment (SCE)

GGCCarnegie ClassNSSE 2010 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year Senior **.24 GGCCarnegie ClassNSSE 2010 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year *.14 Senior **.26 GGCCarnegie BasicNSSE 2009 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year ***.26 Senior ***.36 GGCCarnegie ClassNSSE 2008 ClassMean a Sig b Effect Size c Mean a Sig b Effect Size c First-Year ** ***.35 Senior ** ***.66

Supportive Campus EnvironmentGGCNSSEGGCNSSEGGCNSSEGGCNSSE How well do students get along with other students? % of FY students report that their peers are friendly, supportive, and help them feel as if they belong Are students satisfied with their overall educational experience? % of FY students report a favorable image of this institution; % of seniors would choose this school again if they could start their college career over How much time do students devote to co-curricular activities? % of FY students spend more than 15 hours a week participating in co- curricular activities. % spend no time participating in co-curricular activities How well do students get along with administrators and staff? % of FY students find the administrative personnel and offices helpful, considerate, and flexible To what extent does the school help students deal with their academic and social needs? % of FY students feel that this institution has a substantial commitment to their academic success. % feel well-supported by the institution regarding their social needs

First Year StudentsSeniors

The Good NewsThe Bad News Comparisons to USG schools  LAC is equivalent  ACL is substantially higher  SFI is significantly and substantially higher for FY; equivalent for SR  SCE is equivalent for FY and significantly and substantially higher for SR  EEE is significantly and substantially lower Comparisons to Carnegie Class  LAC is equivalent for both FY and SR (this is a statistical improvement over 2010; GGC scores are stable for FY and up for SR.)  ACL is significantly higher for both FY and SR  SFI continues to be significantly higher for FY and equivalent for SR  EEE is equivalent for FY  SCE remains equivalent for both FY and SR  EEE remains significantly lower for SR, but difference is smaller

The Good NewsThe Bad News Comparisons to full NSSE sample  LAC: GGC mean falls above 25%tile for top 50% for FY and top 10% for SR  ACL continues to be significantly and substantially higher than NSSE sample for both FY and SR; GGC mean falls WELL above 25%tile for top 50% and top 10% for both FY and SR  SFI scores are significantly and substantially above the mean for FY and equivalent for SR; GGC Mean falls above 25%tile for top 50% and 10% for both FY and SR  EEE: GGC mean falls above 25%tile for top 10% for FY  SCE scores are equivalent to national sample for FY and statistically and substantially above national mean for SR; GGC Mean falls well above 25%tile for both top 50% and 10% for both FY and SR  LAC continues to lag statistically; GGC mean falls below 25%tile for top 10% for FY; gap is widening for both FY and SR  EEE continues to lag statistically; GGC mean is at 25%tile for top 50% and below 25%tile for top 50% for SR Trends  LAC scores have stayed stable across all four years  ACL scores have stablilized over past two years for FY and have remained stable across four years for SR  EEE scores have stabilized over past two years – drops came between 2009 and 2010 (1500 vs 3500 students)  SCE scores have remained stable across three years for SR  SFI scores show declines across years; gap is widening between GGC and top 50% and 10% for SR  SCE scores show a declining trend for FY

The Good NewsThe Bad News Other -- Specific Items  There has been a noticable increase in the % of SRs who have participated in some form of practicum, internship, field experience, co-op or clinical assignment, although this continues to lag behind national figures  There has been a noticeable drop in the % of FY students who find administrative personnel and offices helpful, considerate and flexible  There has been a noticeable drop in the % of FY students who find faculty available, helpful and sympathetic  There has been a noticeable drop in the % of seniors who discuss career plans with faculty

 Most benchmark scores have stabilized this year  Level of Academic Challenge scores are, for this year equivalent to our Carnegie peers  We continue to receive scores higher than average and higher than peers in  Active and Collaborative Learning (FY and SR)  Student –Faculty Interaction(FY and SR)  Supportive Campus Environment (SR)

 Across all benchmarks except EEE, the GGC mean lies within the middle 50% of means for the top 50% of schools in the NSSE sample  Across many benchmarks, the GGC mean falls within the middle 50% of means for the top 10% of schools in the NSSE sample  LAC – SR  ACL – FY and SR  SFI – FY and SR  SCE – FY and SR