Initiative for Optimal Doctoral Completion. How are UGA programs performing with respect to doctoral completion figures? All of this leads to the question:

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Strategic Intervention for Doctoral Completion
Advertisements

Utilizing Data to Foster Program-level Change Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School.
December 9, 2006 Council of Graduate Schools 1 Ph.D. Completion Project: Tools and Templates 46 th CGS Annual Meeting Technical Workshop.
Council of Graduate Schools PhD Completion Project Phase II ( ) RFP: Eligibility and Requirements December 9, 2006 Washington, DC.
1 STRATEGIC INTERVENTION FOR DOCTORAL COMPLETION Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia.
Cedarville University Accreditation Self-Study Plan Presented by Dr. Thomas Mach.
Prior Learning Assessment and Recognition (PLAR) CANADA Canadian Information Centre for International Credentials (CICIC) at the Council of Ministers of.
College & Career Readiness in Illinois Brian Durham Senior Director for Academic Affairs & CTE Illinois Community College Board
Results of the Faculty Survey on Internationalization at Villanova: A Preliminary Report Prepared for the International Leadership Committee Prepared by.
An Assessment Primer Fall 2007 Click here to begin.
How Your Application Is Reviewed Vonda Smith, Ph.D. Scientific Review Officer (SRO)
Grad Tools Pilot Grad Tools and The Dissertation Checklist CARAT Updates Presentation March 19, 2004 Presenters: Michelle Bejian Lotia, Duderstadt Center.
Faculty Survey of Student Engagement Using What Faculty Say about Improving Their Teaching Thomas F. Nelson Laird, IUB Jennifer Buckley, IUB Megan Palmer,
Graduate Program Review Prof. Emad Ali. Major Review Steps Self-study Report External evaluation Apply actions for improvement.
Effective Outreach Strategies to IT Students Lessons Learned by BATEC National Career Pathways Network Louisville, Kentucky October 10 –
PhD Program Best Practices at the University of Florida A Provost Fellowship Project Spring 2006 Prepared by Sylvia Chan-Olmsted Professor and Associate.
Temple University Russell Conwell Learning Center Office of Senior Vice Provost for Undergraduate Studies GETTING INVOLVED IN RESEARCH AT TEMPLE UNIVERSITY.
Academic Assessment Report for the Academic Year Antioch University New England Office of Academic Assessment Tom Julius, Ed.D., Director Submitted.
National Public Health Performance Standards Local Assessment Instrument Essential Service:10 Research for New Insights and Innovative Solutions to Health.
USA High Meets Notre Dame of Maryland University…and a PDS Partnership is Born… _______________, Site Coordinator, USA High ____________, Liaison, Notre.
Finding a Job Pizza Seminar October 30, 2006 Dr. TJ Murphy Pizza Seminar October 30, 2006 Dr. TJ Murphy.
Engaging the Arts and Sciences at the University of Kentucky Working Together to Prepare Quality Educators.
AL-QADISIYIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING SELF ASSESSMENT REPORT Submitted by SAR committee.
Being a Successful Graduate Student  As a new graduate student, you are likely wondering:  What is graduate school like?  What should I expect?  Can.
Writing Your Program’s SPA Report(s) Cynthia Conn, Ph.D., Associate Director, Office of Academic Assessment Chris Geanious, Project Director, College of.
REU PI Meeting Best Practices Chair: Masoud Milani Scribe: Behrooz Shirazi April 27, 2007.
“Undergraduate and Graduate Education/Research and Choosing the Right Program and Advisor” Dr. Stephanie Luster-Teasley Department of Civil and Environmental.
Staff Development Approaches at The University of Georgia: Philosophy, Models, and Financial Support University of Georgia Institute of Higher Education.
Ph. D. Completion and Attrition: Analysis of Baseline Data NSF AGEP Evaluation Capacity Meeting September 19, 2008 Robert Sowell Council of Graduate Schools.
Columbia University :: Office of the Provost :: Planning and Institutional Research NRC Assessment of Research-Doctoral Programs October 27,
In existence since 1981, the Commission for Women identifies areas of concern to women employees and students of Penn State, and suggests changes in existing.
Managing Your Graduate Program John Sessions Chair, FERM SFM Graduate Program September 19, 2012.
Assessing SAGES with NSSE data Office of Institutional Research September 25 th, 2007.
WELCOME Rehabilitation Sciences Doctoral Program Faculty and Students.
AHRQ 2011 Annual Conference: Insights from the AHRQ Peer Review Process Training Grant Review Perspective Denise G. Tate Ph.D., Professor, Chair HCRT Study.
WHY GO TO COLLEGE??? 9 th Grade. WHY SHOULD WE EVEN CONSIDER GOING TO COLLEGE? Going to college is important for securing a quality career after graduation.
Using Family Connection Online Resource for Planning & Advising Overview for Parents.
Practicing Meaningful Learning Outcomes Assessment at UGA Department of Crop and Soil Sciences August 10, 2015 Dr. Leslie Gordon Associate Director for.
1 SCU’s WASC Reaccreditation Diane Jonte-Pace, Self Study Steering Committee Chair Don Dodson, Academic Liaison Officer Winter 2007.
GRADUATE PERSPECTIVES National Views of Best Practices for Enrollment Management of Graduate Programs Sherry F. Queener, Ph.D.
Starting New Research Projects and Building Collaborations Early Career Faculty Workshop 2015 Sarah Penniston-Dorland University of Maryland.
A Comprehensive Plan for Student Services. Northeast Wisconsin Technical College Two-year technical college in Green Bay, WI Established as a vocational.
PRESIDENT’S Campus forum November 9, Dr. Shirley Wagner and Dr. Paul Weizer NEASC Self Study Co-Chairs Key Elements of the Self Study Process Demystifying.
Middle States Reaccreditation Process at The Catholic University of America.
An NSF-Sponsored Collaborative Effort of SBE Programs at: Stanford University Texas A&M University University of Southern California University of Texas.
Program Services Coordinator Transfer Center Hiring Justification Soraya Sohrabi.
Assessing Student Learning Workshop for Department Chairs & Program Directors Workshop for Department Chairs & Program Directors January 9, 2007.
Taking Action to Optimize Doctoral Completion Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia Strategic Intervention for Doctoral.
Evaluating Our Assessment Program Spring 2004 What is assessment? Assessment is the ongoing process of understanding and improving student learning.
Initiative for Optimal Doctoral Completion. Doctoral completion and non- completion are certainly not novel ideas. All of us have witnessed the phenomenon.
Delwyn L. Harnisch, University of Nebraska – Lincoln Leslie Lukin, Lincoln Public Schools.
PRESENTER: Deb Sullivan Ford. AVC2CSU is a proposed comprehensive cohort pathway program intended to allow students pursuing select AS-T and AA-T degrees.
Research And Evaluation Differences Between Research and Evaluation  Research and evaluation are closely related but differ in four ways: –The purpose.
Making an Excellent School More Excellent: Weston High School’s 21st Century Learning Expectations and Goals
1 Establishing a New Gallaudet Program Review Process Pat Hulsebosch Office of Academic Quality CUE – 9/3/08: CGE – 9/16/08.
CATS Self Review and Planning Tool An Introduction and Overview Alison Poot and Melody West, CATS Project Team (University of Tasmania)
Meadow Lakes Elementary
Innovation in T&L: moving the needle?
Utilizing Data to Foster Program-level Change
The Role of Students in Program and Course Evaluation
Student Growth, recruitment, and Retention
Exploring CSU and the WHY
Center For Faculty Excellence: Leadership and Faculty Development
Academic Planning Doctoral Students
Internship Bill of Rights
Quality assurance and curriculum development
Advising Doctoral Students
The Heart of Student Success
SSHRC Institutional Grant University
Meadow Lakes Elementary
Presentation transcript:

Initiative for Optimal Doctoral Completion

How are UGA programs performing with respect to doctoral completion figures? All of this leads to the question:

How are UGA programs performing? We examined the performance of one cohort: the 474 doctoral students who entered programs between Fall of 1998 and Summer of 1999.

30% 4% 33% 66% 7% 60% Completion Status for All Doctoral Programs Cohort (N=475) 20% 40% 80% 100% 60% N=144 N=18 N=313 Withdrew

30% 4% 33% 66% 7% 60% 30% 6% 64% 30% 3% 68% 34% 6% 60% 25% 1% 74% 57% 43% Completion Status by Broad Field (N=475) %

30% 4% 33% 66% 7% 60% Time to Degree for All Programs Cohort (Graduates Only N=313) Median=4.67 # Students Years

30% 4% 33% 66% 7% 60% Time To Degree by Broad Field Cohort (N=313)

30% 4% 33% 66% 7% 60% Time to Withdraw for All Programs Cohort (Non-completers Only. N=144) Median=1.67 # Students Years

30% 4% 33% 66% 7% 60% Time To Withdraw by Broad Field Cohort (N=144)

How Does UGA Compare to Other Universities? Broad FieldPercent Completion UGA CGS National Duke Humanities Life Sciences Math and Physical Sciences Social Sciences ALL PROGRAMS

What the UGA Graduate School will do during the Initiative Create Data Systems to help faculty understand the performance of their programs. Provide faculty members with Web-based Information Resources to foster self-study and program improvement. Provide Direct Support to those programs most in need of improvement.

Creating Data Systems Two things have become clear during our preliminary work: 1.In general, most faculty members do not know how well their programs are performing with respect to doctoral completion. 2.In general, programs do not keep track of reasons for non-completion.

Three Data Activities Drillable Data Set for faculty investigation and program self assessment Non-Completion Reasons systematically collected, tabulated, and shared with programs Follow-up questionnaire data collected from completers and non-completers

Drillable Database The Graduate School worked with the Office of Institutional Research to construct a data base that faculty could use to understand their program performance. Starting this week, that data base is available to faculty to study patterns in their own programs and compare them with other university programs.

Completion Figures for All Programs

Completion Figures for One High Performing Program

Completion Figures for One Low Performing Program

The Need for Interpretive Benchmarks No one involved in higher education believes that 100% of admitted students should graduate. But how does a program determine whether or not it is performing well? –By comparing itself with other programs in the nation and –By comparing itself with other programs at UGA.

30% 4% 33% 66% 7% 60% Interpretive Benchmarks: Graduation Cohort (N=75 Programs)

30% 4% 33% 66% 7% 60% Interpretive Benchmarks: Time to Degree Cohort (N=75 Programs)

30% 4% 33% 66% 7% 60% Interpretive Benchmarks: Time to Withdraw Cohort (N=75 Programs)

Establishing Benchmarks This Spring, the Graduate School will convene an advisory committee on benchmarks. We would welcome volunteers with expertise to help us create quality benchmarks that are: –technically defensible and –of maximum acceptability to the graduate faculty.

Non-Completion Reasons The Graduate School will distribute a “Non- completer List” to all Graduate Coordinators for their respective doctoral programs. Graduate Coordinators will be asked to visit a web site to complete a very brief report stating the reason for each non-completion.

Follow-up Student Questionnaires The questionnaires will collect data that will help us better understand doctoral completion and non-completion. Separate web-based surveys will be conducted for completers and non-completers twice a year. Results will be shared with faculty. Pilot administration will begin this Spring.

Information Activities Through a website and , information will be provided to all members of the graduate faculty to enable them to: –Understand the issues surrounding the use of doctoral completion figures as an indicator of program quality –Engage in program level self-study and program improvement

Direct Support to Programs For programs who recognize the need to improve their doctoral completion figures, the Graduate School will work collaboratively with faculty to develop and carry out a plan of action.

Actions YOU can take After this session, go back and investigate your own program’s performance using the drillable database. Share the data with your colleagues and discuss at upcoming faculty meetings.

Framework for Action At the Graduate School, we developed a Framework for Action that sets forth conditions that are likely to lead to high doctoral completion. (See green handout.) We urge you to use the framework to assess your program with respect to the four conditions in the framework.

Does Your Program Fulfill the Four Conditions in the Framework? Condition #1: The right people apply for doctoral study. Do you have a high quality website? Do you provide potential applicants with realistic information about academic demands, funding, and time to completion? Condition #2: The right applicants are admitted as doctoral students. Does the admissions process rely on faculty judgment and insight about an applicant’s likelihood of success? Or is it largely a clerical task? Assessing your Program

Does Your Program Fulfill the Four Conditions in the Framework? Condition #3: Students and faculty form productive working relationships. How are students matched with major professors? Is there a process to remedy a bad match? How do new professors learn to mentor doctoral students? Condition #4: Students experience social support from fellow students. Do students have the opportunity to interact professionally (seminars, mini- conferences)? Do students have a location where they can interact socially (lunchroom, lounge, etc.)? Assessing Your Program

If the statistics and your own inquiries point to a need for improvement... Review the four strategy sheets (handouts) to see ideas for improving your program. Visit our website to see strategies that other programs have used in the past. Contact the graduate school to ask for our help. Program Improvement

Questions, Comments and Concerns?