Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Student Equity Planning August 28, rd Meeting

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Student Equity Planning August 28, rd Meeting"— Presentation transcript:

1 Student Equity Planning August 28, 2015 3rd Meeting
Brad C. Phillips, Ph.D. President/CEO Twitter bphillipsiebc

2 An Exercise In the last week what one thing did you do to make the most difference in student success?

3 Data Review Template  Is this information accurate?
 What jumps out at you and why?  What are the themes?  Is there comparison data available?  Does this information challenge current assumptions about this population?  What might be contributing to success?  What might be detracting from success?  Is this the data we need to make a decision?  What is the most important information?  What is missing?

4 Your Data – Preliminary Observations
Enrollment relatively flat Hispanic enrollment increasing up 7% in two years Differential success rates for all course levels – some as high as 15% Some populations have retention rates that are disproportionality high compared with their success rates Similar statistics for those working to move out of pre-collegiate course to collegiate level (could be higher for English, above average for math) Low income and foster youth stats are low Completion rates are pretty good but could be higher Achievement gap is holding or getting larger

5 Your Data – Fall 2011 First Time in College Cohort
Course Success Rates (A, B, C or credit) Overall 68% (N=3620) One third of all new student enrollments are not successful One-third NOT Successful

6 Overall Course Success Rate : 68%
African American Success Rate – 51% 49% NOT Successful

7 Your Data – Fall 2011 First Time in College Cohort
Course Success Rates (A, B, C or credit) Overall 68% (N=3620) One third of all new student enrollments are not successful 51% success rates for AA (n=311) Almost half are NOT successful 60% for year olds (n=654) 4 out of 10 are NOT successful

8 Your Data – Persistence
Fall 2007 Cohort 64% still here in Spring 08 50% are gone in Fall 08 4.4% transferred 2.2% earned an award Fall 2011 Cohort 75% still here in Spring 12 45% are gone in Fall 12 2.6% transferred 0.5% earned an award

9 Basic Skills Data English 62 vs. 92 Success rates in Eng101:
Transition rates College Level Eng % Eng % Is every section now an Eng 92

10 Emerging and Significant Programs: Puente and Dual Enrollment

11 Puente Outcomes English 101 success rates 84% vs. 72% English transition rates 18% higher than other students Serves a small number of students

12 Dual Enrollment N= 949 students Taking courses in 69 sections
Enrolled after high school at MSJC – 13% Not a program that addresses equity issues

13 CCSSE Data Survey of student engagement 5 scales
Active and Collaborative learning Student Effort Academic Challenge Student-Faculty Interaction Support for Learners

14 CCSSE Highlights All MSJC outcomes are slightly lower than the 2015 CCSSE cohort average Areas that MSJC scored significantly better than the cohort: Integrating ideas into a paper or class project Financial support Career counseling Peer or other tutoring

15 CCSSE Highlights Areas rated low:
Discussed ideas on readings outside of class with faculty Worked with faculty on activities other than coursework Faculty helped the student cope with non-academic issues Engaged in skill labs Engaged with computer labs

16 CCSSE Highlights Faculty vs. Student perceptions
Providing prompt feedback 91% vs. 62% (often/very) Students skip class 90% vs. 50% (often/very/sometimes) Skip assignments 5% vs. 50% (never)

17 Overall Themes Course success rates are average
They have improved from Fa 07 to Fa 11 by 9% Promising outcomes in accelerated English (92) and Puente Enrollment reducing Poor outcomes for AA and yr old populations Achievement gap is holding or getting larger Year to year persistence in poor Overall completion outcomes are low Financial aid and Career Counseling is perceived as strong Faculty/student connection is perceived as weak Perceptions are very different between faculty and students Are special programs doing what is needed?

18 What does this Mean for MSJC?

19 Examination of Policies
How is the policy actualized What really happens? What are the exceptions? Who can investigate what? Assignments One paragraph that answers the questions above

20 Examination of Policies
Admission Registration Matriculation (Orientation, advising, etc) Assessment Placement Development education/remediation Attendance Attendance tracking (Class) Early alert Probation Financial aid disbursement Dual enrollment Faculty professional development Staff professional development Adjunct faculty commitment

21 Setting Criteria – A Sample
Must map policies and practices to the problem No small non- scalable practices No small grants for innovation Think big, start small Not about restoring what was lost in the cuts Must be able to go to scale Must be researched-based Must be able to implemented properly Must be adequately resourced Think systemically Modest gains can be made with student services alone, Large gains can be made with instructional interventions and student services combined

22 Next Steps Finalize focus group populations Set meeting dates
Determine final set of observations Examine and determine high impact research-based practices for MSJC Outreach to MSJC community Develop implementation strategy Develop evaluation plan Finalize plan to CCCCO


Download ppt "Student Equity Planning August 28, rd Meeting"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google