nsse 2014: accolades and action items faculty senate nov. 20, 2014 patrick barlow, ph.d., assessment...
TRANSCRIPT
NSSE 2014:Accolades and Action ItemsFaculty Senate Nov. 20, 2014
Patrick Barlow, Ph.D., Assessment Coordinator
Accolades
• Administered to First Year (828) and Senior Students (674)
• Survey had 3 major sections: Standard items (87), Standard Demographics (22) UW Consortium (23), Experiences with Writing Module (13)
• 3 Comparison Groups: UW system peers (8), Carnegie Class (264), entire 13/14 NSSE group (983)
• Accolades: • Access to High Impact Practices• Supportive campus environment• Improvement in Engagement Indicators FY to SR year• Improvement in Writing Experiences• Overall Satisfaction and Desire to Return.
HIPs
• 62% of FY students experience at least one HIP (primarily service learning)
• 96% of SR students experience at least one HIP.
Satisfaction & Desire to Return
First-year
Senior
Percentage Rating Their Overall Experience as "Excellent" or "Good"
89%
94%
87%
93%
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
UW Comprehensives
UW-L
UW Comprehensives
UW-L
First-year
Senior
Percentage Who Would "Definitely" or "Probably" Attend This Institution Again
86%
91%
85%
90%
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
UW Comprehensives
UW-L
UW Comprehensives
UW-L
Experiences with Writing: First Year
Most Common to Least Common Writing Tasks: First Year(based on frequency count of Most or All assignments)
Assignments/Student Behaviors %1Analyzed or evaluated something you read, researched, or observed 56
2Received feedback from a classmate, friend, or family member about a draft before turning in your final assignment
49
3Summarized material you read, such as articles, books, or online publications
46
4Argued a position using evidence and reasoning 425Gave Feedback to a classmate about a draft for outline 396Addressed a real or imagined audience 35
7Talked with a classmate, family member, friend to develop your ideas before starting assignment
33
8Wrote in the style and format of a specific field 30
9Described your methods or findings related to data you collected 27
10Explained in writing the meaning of numerical or statistical data 17
Instructor Behaviors
1Provided clear instructions describing what she or he wanted you to do 83
2Explained in advance the criteria used to grade your assignment 783Explained in advance what he or she wanted you to learn 61
Experiences with Writing: Seniors
Most Common to Least Common Writing Tasks: Seniors(based on frequency count of Most or All assignments)
Assignments/Student Behaviors %1Analyzed or evaluated something you read, researched, or observed 702Wrote in the style and format of a specific field 623Summarized material you read, such as articles, books, or online publications 564Argued a position using evidence and reasoning 485Described your methods or findings related to data you collected 406Addressed a real or imagined audience 39
7Received feedback from a classmate, friend, or family member about a draft before turning in your final assignment 33
8Talked with a classmate, family member, friend to develop your ideas before starting assignment 30
9Explained in writing the meaning of numerical or statistical data 2910Gave Feedback to a classmate about a draft for outline 24
Instructor Behaviors1Provided clear instructions describing what she or he wanted you to do 852Explained in advance the criteria used to grade your assignment 823Explained in advance what he or she wanted you to learn 64
Action Items
• Action Items:• Low Engagement in Learning Strategies (SR&FY)• Low Engagement in Diversity Experiences (SR&FY)• Low Student Faculty Interaction (primarily FY)• Concerns on Access to General Education Courses and
Advising (FY)• Writing Experiences: Nature of Tasks (FY)• Addressing Personal Obstacles to Academic Progress (SR)
Learning Strategies (SR % shown)
UW-L UW Comprehensives Carnegie Class NSSE 2013 & 2014
Mean MeanEffect
size MeanEffect
size MeanEffect
size
Learning Strategies FY 37.7 36.3* .10 39.7*** -.14 39.5*** -.13
Learning Strategies SR 37.8 37.2 .04 41.0*** -.21 40.3*** -.17Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard deviation; Symbols on the Overview page are based on effect size and p before rounding.
Discussions with Diverse Others (SR % shown)
UWLUW
Comprehensives Carnegie Class NSSE 2013 & 2014
Mean MeanEffect
size MeanEffect
size MeanEffect
size
Discussions with Diverse Others FY 36.6 35.9 .04 40.3*** -.23 40.9*** -.27
Discussions with Diverse Others SR 36.9 37.1 -.01 41.5*** -.28 41.8*** -.31
Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard deviation; Symbols on the Overview page are based on effect size and p before rounding.
Student Faculty Interaction: FY Results
UW-LYour first-year students compared with
UW Comprehensives Carnegie Class NSSE 2013 & 2014Engagement Indicator Mean Mean
Effect size Mean
Effect size Mean
Effect size
Student-Faculty Interaction 17.8 19.9*** -.15 20.0*** -.15 20.3*** -.17
Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard deviation; Symbols on the Overview page are based on effect size and p before rounding.
Student Faculty Interaction: Senior Results
UW-LYour senior students compared with
UW Comprehensives Carnegie Class NSSE 2013 & 2014Engagement Indicator Mean Mean
Effect size Mean
Effect size Mean
Effect size
Student-Faculty Interaction 26.1 24.8* .08 23.2*** .18 23.7*** .15
Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard deviation; Symbols on the Overview page are based on effect size and p before rounding.
Barriers for Academic Progress: FY
UW Consortium Item wording or description UW-L Mean UW MeanEffect
size
My advising interactions help me make better decisions about my academic goals (18% Disagree)
3.0 ▽ 3.1** -.13
How satisfied have you been with the availability of courses needed to fulfill general education requirements? (32% Dissatisfied)
2.7 ▽ 2.9*** -.26
Difficulties getting the courses you need(45% minor, 27% mod, 10% major)
2.3 ▲ 2.0*** .32
Lack of good academic advising(30% minor, 12% mod, 4% major)
1.7 △ 1.6** .13
Barriers to Academic Progress: SR
Please rate the following as obstacles to your academic progress during the current academic year UW-L UW Comprehensives Effect
size
Lack of personal motivation (38 % Minor, 18 % Mod, 6% Major)
1.9 △ 1.8*** .17
Poor academic performance (28% Minor, 9 % Mod, 3% Major)
1.6 △ 1.4*** .20
Personal health issues, physical or mental (27% Minor, 16% Mod, 6% Major)
1.8 △ 1.6** .13
Writing Experiences: FY concerns
• First Year Responses to items on writing indicated concerns.• UWL experience contributed to Writing clearly and effectively
(below Carnegie and NSSE groups)
• Experiences with Writing Module indicated concerns:• Analyzed or evaluated something you read, researched, or
observed• Described your methods or findings related to data you
collected in lab or field work, a survey project, etc.• Argued a position using evidence and reasoning• Provided clear instructions describing what he or she wanted
you to do• Explained in advance what he or she wanted you to learn
Recommendations
1. For all students, engaging them in more academic and co-curricular activities that expose them to multiple perspectives and interactions across difference would help address some of the diversity concerns.
2. Finding paths for first year students to connect with faculty would be advantageous and would build on aspects of our Firm Footing project like Eagle Alert and the advising taskforce.
3. Ongoing review of our approaches to writing instruction and the nature of writing assignments appears warranted. This may be best started by looking at what is taking place in the first year.
4. Course access for lower division students as an obstacle to progress may prove to be a good area for review as we are already aware of some issues for access to science courses and the growing national interest on the need to monitor and report on graduation rates.
Response Rates
First-year Senior
UW-L
UW Comprehensives
Carnegie Class
NSSE 2013 &
2014 UW-L
UW Comprehensives
Carnegie Class
NSSE 2013 &
2014Response rate 35% 25% 22% 22% 36% 30% 27% 26%Sampling errorb +/- 2.8% +/- 1.5% +/- 0.3% +/- 0.2% +/- 3% +/- 1.2% +/- 0.3% +/- 0.1%a. Comparison group response rate and sampling error were computed at the student level (i.e., they are not institution averages).b. Also called “margin of error,” sampling error is an estimate of the amount the true score on a given item could differ from the estimate based on a sample. For example, if the sampling error is +/- 5.0% and 40% of your students reply "Very often" to a particular item, then the true population value is most likely between 35% and 45%.
Representativeness: Race/Ethnicity
First-year Senior Representativeness Respondent % Population % Respondent
%Population %
Female 65 56 65 58Full-time 100 99 95 95First-time, first-year 85 79 N/A N/ARace/ethnicitya Am. Indian or Alaska Native 0 0 0 0Asian 2 2 1 2Black or African American 1 1 1 1Hispanic or Latino 3 3 3 3Native Hawaiian/Other Pac. Isl.
0 0 0 0White 87 87 91 90Other 0 0 0 0Foreign or nonresident alien 3 3 1 1Two or more races/ethicities 3 4 2 3Unknown 0 0 1 0