America s Brightest ORANGE

Similar documents
NATIONAL SURVEY OF STUDENT ENGAGEMENT

NATIONAL SURVEY OF STUDENT ENGAGEMENT (NSSE)

2005 National Survey of Student Engagement: Freshman and Senior Students at. St. Cloud State University. Preliminary Report.

ABET Criteria for Accrediting Computer Science Programs

Office of Institutional Effectiveness 2012 NATIONAL SURVEY OF STUDENT ENGAGEMENT (NSSE) DIVERSITY ANALYSIS BY CLASS LEVEL AND GENDER VISION

National Survey of Student Engagement Spring University of Kansas. Executive Summary

National Survey of Student Engagement

2009 National Survey of Student Engagement. Oklahoma State University

NATIONAL SURVEY OF STUDENT ENGAGEMENT

UK Institutional Research Brief: Results of the 2012 National Survey of Student Engagement: A Comparison with Carnegie Peer Institutions

2016 Match List. Residency Program Distribution by Specialty. Anesthesiology. Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis MO

medicaid and the How will the Medicaid Expansion for Adults Impact Eligibility and Coverage? Key Findings in Brief

FY year and 3-year Cohort Default Rates by State and Level and Control of Institution

What Is The National Survey Of Student Engagement (NSSE)?

BENCHMARK TREND COMPARISON REPORT:

NATIONAL SURVEY OF STUDENT ENGAGEMENT

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)

Junior (61-90 semester hours or quarter hours) Two-year Colleges Number of Students Tested at Each Institution July 2008 through June 2013

National Survey of Student Engagement at UND Highlights for Students. Sue Erickson Carmen Williams Office of Institutional Research April 19, 2012

Wilma Rudolph Student Athlete Achievement Award

National Survey of Student Engagement The College Student Report

VOL VISION 2020 STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

2007 NIRSA Salary Census Compiled by the National Intramural-Recreational Sports Association NIRSA National Center, Corvallis, Oregon

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) Temple University 2016 Results

National Survey of Student Engagement Executive Snapshot 2010

A Comparison of the ERP Offerings of AACSB Accredited Universities Belonging to SAPUA

STATE CAPITAL SPENDING ON PK 12 SCHOOL FACILITIES NORTH CAROLINA

Student Admissions, Outcomes, and Other Data

Peer Comparison of Graduate Data

Jon N. Kerr, PhD, CPA August 2017

46 Children s Defense Fund

Update Peer and Aspirant Institutions

Disciplinary action: special education and autism IDEA laws, zero tolerance in schools, and disciplinary action

The College of New Jersey Department of Chemistry. Overview- 2009

A Profile of Top Performers on the Uniform CPA Exam

2017 National Clean Water Law Seminar and Water Enforcement Workshop Continuing Legal Education (CLE) Credits. States

OFFICE OF ENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT. Annual Report

BUILDING CAPACITY FOR COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS: LESSONS LEARNED FROM NAEP ITEM ANALYSES. Council of the Great City Schools

Understanding the First Year Experience: An Avenue to Explore Trends in Higher Education (Keynote)

Redirected Inbound Call Sampling An Example of Fit for Purpose Non-probability Sample Design

Revision and Assessment Plan for the Neumann University Core Experience

Average Loan or Lease Term. Average

Fostering Equity and Student Success in Higher Education

The Ohio State University Library System Improvement Request,

Missouri 4-H University of Missouri 4-H Center for Youth Development

ELLEN E. ENGEL. Stanford University, Graduate School of Business, Ph.D. - Accounting, 1997.

JANIE HODGE, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Special Education 225 Holtzendorff Clemson University

About the College Board. College Board Advocacy & Policy Center

TRENDS IN. College Pricing

2013 donorcentrics Annual Report on Higher Education Alumni Giving

Online Journal for Workforce Education and Development Volume V, Issue 3 - Fall 2011

Anatomy and Physiology. Astronomy. Boomilever. Bungee Drop

Housekeeping. Questions

Executive Summary. Marian Catholic High School. Mr. Steven Tortorello, Principal 700 Ashland Avenue Chicago Heights, IL

2010 National Survey of Student Engagement University Report

Executive Summary. Hialeah Gardens High School

Examining the Structure of a Multidisciplinary Engineering Capstone Design Program

Cooper Upper Elementary School

The Economic Impact of College Bowl Games

Len Lundstrum, Ph.D., FRM

George Mason University Graduate School of Education Education Leadership Program. Course Syllabus Spring 2006

Trends in College Pricing

MGMT 3280: Strategic Management

DUAL ENROLLMENT ADMISSIONS APPLICATION. You can get anywhere from here.

IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON ACCESS AGREEMENT

Albert (Yan) Wang. Flow-induced Trading Pressure and Corporate Investment (with Xiaoxia Lou), Forthcoming at

ENGINEERING AT ILLINOIS WOMEN IN ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS

Shelters Elementary School

Montana's Distance Learning Policy for Adult Basic and Literacy Education

The following tables contain data that are derived mainly

Student Engagement and Cultures of Self-Discovery

Wisconsin 4 th Grade Reading Results on the 2015 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)


Teach For America alumni 37,000+ Alumni working full-time in education or with low-income communities 86%

Value of Athletics in Higher Education March Prepared by Edward J. Ray, President Oregon State University

Cooper Upper Elementary School

GRADUATE CURRICULUM REVIEW REPORT

Two Million K-12 Teachers Are Now Corralled Into Unions. And 1.3 Million Are Forced to Pay Union Dues, as Well as Accept Union Monopoly Bargaining

Colorado State University Department of Construction Management. Assessment Results and Action Plans

ADMISSION TO THE UNIVERSITY

cover Private Public Schools America s Michael J. Petrilli and Janie Scull

History of CTB in Adult Education Assessment

Strategic Plan Dashboard Results. Office of Institutional Research and Assessment

ACCT 100 Introduction to Accounting Course Syllabus Course # on T Th 12:30 1:45 Spring, 2016: Debra L. Schmidt-Johnson, CPA

SCHOOL. Wake Forest '93. Count

Strategic Plan Update, Physics Department May 2010

93 percent of local providers will not be awarded competitive bidding contracts 2.

10/6/2017 UNDERGRADUATE SUCCESS SCHOLARS PROGRAM. Founded in 1969 as a graduate institution.

Gena Bell Vargas, Ph.D., CTRS

An Empirical Analysis of the Effects of Mexican American Studies Participation on Student Achievement within Tucson Unified School District

Table of Contents Welcome to the Federal Work Study (FWS)/Community Service/America Reads program.

LEN HIGHTOWER, Ph.D.

SAT Results December, 2002 Authors: Chuck Dulaney and Roger Regan WCPSS SAT Scores Reach Historic High

TABLE OF CONTENTS Credit for Prior Learning... 74

Master of Science (MS) in Education with a specialization in. Leadership in Educational Administration

Evaluation of Teach For America:

Curriculum Vitae. Matthew G. Boylan Greene St. Columbia, SC boylan

Teacher Action Research Multiple Intelligence Theory in the Foreign Language Classroom. By Melissa S. Ferro George Mason University

METHODS OF INSTRUCTION IN THE MATHEMATICS CURRICULUM FOR MIDDLE SCHOOL Math 410, Fall 2005 DuSable Hall 306 (Mathematics Education Laboratory)

Transcription:

America s Brightest ORANGE Oklahoma State University : Executive Summary Jeremy D. Penn, Ph.D., Director Mark Nicholas, Ph.D., Assistant Director John D. Hathcoat, M.S., Statistical Analyst Sarah Banks, M.S., Graduate Research Associate October, 2012 405-744-6687

Table of Contents Overview... 1 Survey Purpose... 1 Response Rate... 1 Institutional Comparisons... 1 Benchmark Results... 3 Level of Academic Challenge... 3 Active and Collaborative Learning... 4 Student-Faculty Interaction... 4 Enriching Educational Experiences... 4 Supportive Campus Environment... 4 Areas where OSU Outperformed Peer Institutions... 6 First year students... 6 Senior students... 6 Areas where OSU Underperformed Peer Institutions... 6 First year students... 6 Senior students... 6 The Expectation Gap... 8 Use of Time... 8 Classwork... 8 Diversity... 9 Grades... 9 Recommendations and Discussion... 10 Glossary... 11

Overview Survey Purpose The purpose of this survey was to examine the extent to which current Oklahoma State University (OSU) students were engaged in educationally purposeful activities. The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) is a survey that gathers data on the behaviors by students and institutions that are associated with desired outcomes of college (http://nsse.iub.edu/html/about.cfm). The NSSE is part of a comprehensive assessment process at OSU. Since the NSSE gathers data on what first year students and seniors do during their time at OSU, conceptually it fits after entry-level assessment, overlaps with general education assessment, and sits before program student learning outcomes assessment and alumni satisfaction. NSSE created the survey instrument and managed the data collection and analysis process. OSU pays a fee to NSSE in the years the NSSE is administered. OSU participated in the NSSE in four previous years (2000, 2002, 2005, and 2009). Response Rate The overall response rate on this survey was 15% (13% for first year students and 17% for seniors). This was substantially lower than the response rate at similar institutions (defined in the next section), which was 22%. The response rate in 2012 was also substantially lower than the response rate in 2009, which was also 22%. Although the response rate is low, since the entire first year and senior populations were sampled, the absolute number of responses was large (485 responses from first year students and 917 responses from seniors). The low response rate suggests caution in interpreting results, particularly if the characteristics of those students A student works on a project in a campus lab. who completed the survey are substantially different from those who did not complete the survey. For example, the proportion of female and male students at OSU is approximately equal (the 2012 Student Profile reported approximately 48% of OSU s undergraduate students were female). However, 68% of OSU s first year respondents were female and 57% of OSU s senior respondents were female (note that this pattern is similar to the results at the comparison institutions). As a result, the key to interpreting results from this survey, as with any other survey, is to look for patterns of responses across multiple assessment instruments and years of administration. In this way the NSSE can still provide an important perspective on our students. Institutional Comparisons The Assessment and Academic Improvement Council (AAIC) identified three groups of institutions to provide comparisons for OSU s NSSE results. AAIC examined the complete list of institutions that participated in the 2012 NSSE and identified institutions that were considered to be aspirational, those that were considered to be less competitive, and those that were considered to be similar. The institutions in the comparison groups are shown in Table 1, Table 2, and Table 3. 1

Table 1: Aspirational Institutions (Comparison Group 1) Institution City State Auburn University Auburn AL Clemson University Clemson SC Indiana University Bloomington Bloomington IN Rutgers University-New Brunswick/Piscataway New Brunswick NJ University of Arizona Tucson AZ University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Urbana IL University of Kentucky Lexington KY University of Michigan-Ann Arbor Ann Arbor MI University of South Carolina Columbia SC SUNY-Buffalo State College Buffalo NY University of Miami Coral Gables FL Table 2: Less Competitive Institutions (Comparison Group 2) Institution City State Boise State University Boise ID California State University-Dominguez Hills Carson CA East Carolina University Greenville NC Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne Fort Wayne IN Missouri State University Springfield MO Northern Illinois University Dekalb IL Southern Illinois University Carbondale Carbondale IL University of Mississippi Oxford MS University of Texas at Arlington Arlington TX University of Texas at San Antonio San Antonio TX Western Kentucky University Bowling Green KY Table 3: Similar Peer Institutions (Comparison Group 3) Institution City State Colorado State University Fort Collins CO George Mason University Fairfax VA Texas Tech University Lubbock TX University of Louisville Louisville KY University of Missouri-Columbia Columbia MO University of Oregon Eugene OR Washington State University Pullman WA 2

Benchmark Results The NSSE benchmarks represent an index of responses to several NSSE questions. The benchmarks serve to summarize students responses on a range of questions that are all related to the same broad topic. NSSE provided results for the institutional comparisons with the comparison groups described above and multi-year reports comparing OSU s scores in 2012 with its scores in 2002, 2005, and 2009. The five benchmarks are Level of Academic Challenge, Active and Collaborative Learning, Student- Faculty Interaction, Enriching Educational Experiences, and Supportive Campus Environment. A graphical summary is shown in Table 4 followed by written descriptions. Table 4: Summary of Benchmark Results Benchmark Year Aspirational Less competitive Peer Level of academic challenge First year Senior Active and collaborative learning First year Senior Student-faculty interaction First year Senior Enriching educational experiences First year Senior Supportive campus environment First year Senior Level of Academic Challenge First year: Significantly lower than aspirational institutions (effect size of -.20), not significantly different from less competitive or peer institutions. The average first year student at an aspirational institution reported a higher level of academic challenge than 58% of first year students at OSU. Senior: Significantly lower than aspirational institutions (effect size of -.16), less competitive institutions (effect size of -.20), and peer institutions (effect size of -.18). The average senior student at a peer institution reported a higher level of academic challenge than 57% of senior students at OSU. 3

Sample items: number of written papers of 20 or more pages, between 5 and 19 pages; working harder than you thought you could to meet an instructor s standards or expectations; number of assigned textbooks, books, or book-length packs of course readings; course work emphasizes applying theories or concepts to practical problems or in new situations. Active and Collaborative Learning First year: Significantly lower than aspirational institutions (effect size of -.14), not significantly different from less competitive or peer institutions. The average first year student at an aspirational institution reported a higher level of active and collaborative learning than 56% of first year students at OSU. Senior: Not significantly different from aspirational, less competitive, or peer institutions. Sample items: Made a class presentation, worked with other students on projects during class, asked questions in class or contributed to class discussions, tutored or taught other students (paid or voluntary). Student-Faculty Interaction First year: Significantly higher than peer institutions (effect size of.14), not significantly different from aspirational or less competitive institutions. The average first year student at OSU reported a higher level of student-faculty interaction than 56% of students at peer institutions. Senior: Significantly lower than aspirational institutions (effect size of -.07), not significantly different from less competitive or peer institutions. The average senior student at an aspirational institution reported a higher level of student-faculty interaction than 53% of seniors at OSU. Sample items: Worked on a research project with a faculty member outside of course or program requirements, received prompt written or oral feedback from faculty on your academic performance, discussed grades or assignments with an instructor. Enriching Educational Experiences First year: Significantly lower than aspirational institutions (effect size of -.22) and peer institutions (effect size of -.15), not significantly different from less competitive institutions. The average first year student at a peer institution reported a higher level of enriching educational experiences than 56% of first year students at OSU. Senior: Significantly lower than aspirational institutions (effect size of -.24), significantly higher than less competitive institutions (effect size of.21), not significantly different from peer institutions. The average senior at an aspirational institution reported a higher level of enriching educational experiences than 59% of seniors at OSU. The average OSU student reported a higher level of enriching educational experiences than 58% of seniors at less competitive institutions. Sample items: hours spent participating in co-curricular activities, community service or volunteer work, culminating senior experience, serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity than your own. Supportive Campus Environment First year: Significantly higher than aspirational institutions (effect size of.13), less competitive institutions (effect size of.17), and peer institutions (effect size of.15). The average first year OSU student reported a more supportive campus environment than 55% of first year students at aspirational 4

institutions, than 57% of first year students at less competitive institutions, and 56% of first year students at peer institutions. Senior: Significantly higher than peer institutions (effect size of.08), not significantly different from aspirational or less competitive institutions. The average OSU senior reported a more supportive campus environment than 53% of seniors at peer institutions. The score for OSU seniors in 2012 was significantly higher than the score for seniors in 2009. Sample items: Campus environment provides the support you need to help you succeed academically, quality of relationships with other students, quality of relationships with administrative personnel and offices. 5

Areas where OSU Outperformed Peer Institutions There were many areas where OSU s scores were significantly higher than the selected peer institutions, including: First year students First year number of written papers or reports between 5 and 19 pages. Participated in activities to enhance your spirituality (worship, meditation, prayer, etc.). Community service or volunteer work. Work on a research project with a faculty member outside of course or program requirements. Relationships with other students. Relationships with faculty members. Relationships with administrative personnel and offices. Participating in co-curricular activities. Spending significant amounts of time studying and on academic work. Developing a deepened sense of spirituality. Quality of academic advising at your institution. Your entire educational experience at this institution. If you could start over again, would you go to the same institution you are now attending? Senior students Participated in activities to enhance your spirituality (worship, meditation, prayer, etc.). Relationships with other students. Relationships with faculty members. Relationships with administrative personnel and offices. Your entire educational experience at this institution. If you could start over again, would you go to the same institution you are now attending? Areas where OSU Underperformed Peer Institutions There were many areas where OSU s scores were significantly lower than the selected peer institutions, including: First year students Made a class presentation. Had serious conversation with students of a different race or ethnicity than your own. Had serious conversations with students who are very different from you in terms of their religious beliefs, political opinions, or personal values. Synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences into new, more complex interpretations and relationships. Attended an art exhibit, play, dance, music, theater, or other performance. Foreign language coursework. Working for pay off campus. Used an electronic medium to discuss or complete an assignment. Senior students Number of written papers or reports between 5 and 19 pages. Participated in a community-based project (e.g., service learning) as part of a regular course. Synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences into new, more complex interpretations and relationships. Number of assigned textbooks, books, or book-length packs of course readings. Attended an art exhibit, play, dance, music, theater, or other performance. 6

Foreign language coursework. Used an electronic medium to discuss or complete an assignment. Included diverse perspectives (different races, religions, genders, political beliefs, etc.) in class discussions or writing assignments. Worked on a paper or project that required integrating ideas or information from various sources. 7

The Expectation Gap Results from the 2011 Beginning College Survey of Student Engagement (BCSSE) were used to provide information on how incoming freshmen expected to engage at OSU. The results from the BCSSE were then compared with the 2012 NSSE results. The results presented here are cross-sectional (all respondents from the BCSSE and first year NSSE are included even if students did not participate in both surveys). In general, students reported engagement in the activities below was substantially lower than how they had expected to engage. Use of Time 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 More than 20 hours preparing for class Working for pay 11 or more hours participating in co curricular activities Actual in High School Expected in College Actual In College Classwork 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Ask questions in class or contribute to discussions Make a class presentation Work with Put together classmates ideas or outside of class concepts from to prepare class different assignments courses when completing assignments or during class discussions Actual in High School Expected in College Actual In College 8

Diversity 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Have serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity than your own Have serious conversations with students who are very different from you (relig., politics, values) Actual in High School Expected in College Actual In College Grades 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Actual in High School Expected in College Actual In College 0 Grades of A or A Grades of B or B+ Grades of B or lower 9

Recommendations and Discussion First, OSU s senior students reported a lower level of academic challenge than seniors at the aspirational, less competitive, and peer institutions. This area was also a concern for seniors in 2009 (scoring significantly below selected peers, doctoral extensive participants, and the total 2009 NSSE population), in 2005 (scoring significantly below selected peers, doctoral extensive participants, and the total 2005 NSSE population), and in 2002 (scoring below doctoral extensive and the national pool). (In 2000 this benchmark calculation was not performed.) One strategy that may be helpful in addressing the perceived low level of academic challenge is to see that a larger portion of students participate in highimpacted practices (http://www.aacu.org/leap/hip.cfm). This includes experiences in undergraduate research, learning communities, service learning, writing-intensive courses, and capstone courses and projects. Participation in such experiences should be strongly encouraged or required where possible. Other strategies include incorporating more opportunities for class presentations, encouraging the use of technology to increase collaboration between students in large classes, and modifying the general education program to support increases in the level of academic challenge of the program and to use deep and rich curricula. Second, both seniors and first year students reported a more supportive campus environment than our peer institutions. This is an improvement from 2009 where there was no significant difference between OSU and our peer institutions. This may reflect new initiatives on campus to support students such as the LASSO Center, changes to advising, or improvements to other support services. Third, OSU continues to be lower than peer institutions on two questions related to diversity: 1) Had serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity than your own, and 2) had serious conversations with students who are very different from you in terms of their religious beliefs, political opinions, or personal values. However, the gap is small (effect sizes from -.15 and -.09). Finally, future administrations of the NSSE must take additional steps to ensure a better response rate. Although NSSE has limits on what recruitment procedures are permitted, alternate strategies (such as using phone calls, working with orientation classes, offering cash incentives, etc.) should be explored prior to the survey administration process. 10

Glossary First year students: All students who are classified as first-year by credit hour, regardless of whether or not the student is a first-time student. OSU defines freshman as 0-27 credit hours. This definition also includes transfer, part time, distance, and returning students if their cumulative credit hours are below 27. The credit count does not include Advanced Placement credits or other college credits earned prior to completing high school. NSSE: National Survey of Student Engagement. Seniors: All students who are classified as senior and within 12-24 credit hours of graduation. OSU defines senior as 94 or greater credit hours. 11