Accelerating Student Success: Focusing on Meaningful, Measurable Change - ACE Presentation - Hobsons 2016
•Transferir como PPTX, PDF•
1 gostou•521 visualizações
Presentation by Amy Goodburn, Alison Hilsabeck, Peter Meiksins, Robin Armour, and Stephen M. Smith at the ACE Conference.
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (20)
Semelhante a Accelerating Student Success: Focusing on Meaningful, Measurable Change - ACE Presentation - Hobsons 2016
Semelhante a Accelerating Student Success: Focusing on Meaningful, Measurable Change - ACE Presentation - Hobsons 2016 (20)
Mais de Naviance
Mais de Naviance (20)
Último
Último (20)
Accelerating Student Success: Focusing on Meaningful, Measurable Change - ACE Presentation - Hobsons 2016
- 1. Accelerating Student Success: Focusing on Meaningful, Measurable Change
- 2. University of Nebraska Lincoln Hobsons Amy Goodburn Alison Hilsabeck Stephen M. Smith Today’s Presenters Peter Meiksins Robin Armour Cleveland State University California Community Colleges National Louis University
- 4. 31% 59% Full-time, first-time bachelor’s- degree-seeking students graduating in 6 years Full-time, first-time certificate or associate’s degree- seeking students graduating in 3 years NCES (2015), The Condition of Education 2015
- 5. Our Philosophy Success must be measured Success requires engagement Success entails academic achievement Success is a moving target
- 6. University of Nebraska Lincoln Amy Goodburn
- 7. Donec tincidunt enim sit amet consequat Ed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem accusantium doloremque n culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, Id estaborum et dolorum fuga. Goal: 60% six-year graduation rate by 2017
- 8. Flagship Land Grant University 20,000+ Undergrads State Capitol, 300,000
- 9. Donec tincidunt enim sit amet consequat Ed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem accusantium doloremque n culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, Id estaborum et dolorum fuga. Connect Plan Outreach
- 12. First Year Husker Program
- 13. Plan
- 16. Integrated Planning and Advising Academic Maps and Milestones Student Success Tracking Department Class Scheduling
- 17. Outreach to First-Year Students
- 19. Emerging Leaders
- 21. UNL’s Chronology of Change 2012 Implemented Starfish for university-wide advisory Created Advising Coordinating Board Created Explore Center 2016 2015 2014 2013 Created Office of First-Year Experience Opened instructor flags and referrals Formed Academic Advising Association Implemented probation recovery program Published four-year plans for all undergraduates Implemented Transferology for transfer students Piloted Compass program Developed HuskerScan to track student participation Created Veteran and Military Success Center Fed first-year survey scores to advisors Developing Integrated Planning and Advising System Implementing Emerging Leaders Program
- 22. National Louis University Alison Hilsabeck
- 23. • 130-year-old, independent non- profit, Chicago-based university • Core Values: Access, innovation, and excellence • Focus “Professionalizing the helping professions,” including education, psychology, health, and human services Overview National Louis University • 50+ Degrees Offered Undergraduate through doctoral • Serving Approximately 7,000 Working adults and first-generation students
- 24. Our Commitments Continuous improvement in retention across programs Addressing the national undergrad achievement gap National Louis University
- 25. Why Students Don’t Enroll/Persist • Limited-quality college options unless student is a top academic performer • Financial barriers • Need to work or take care of family • Limited career planning and course- taking guidance • Lack of readiness in terms of academic or non-cognitive skills • Limited academic and personal support, often first-generation Pathways Program Value Proposition 2.0+ GPA req.; non-traditional recruitment and admissions Affordable at $10K/year Predictable F2F schedule Clear pathway to a degree with well-defined coursework Flipped and adaptive learning model that uses technology and provides data-driven support High-touch, supportive environment with Success Coach Undergraduate Challenge
- 26. HP3Fall2015UndergraduateInitiative-Demographics Female 69% Male 31% Gender $1 - $5K 21% $10K-$14K 1% $5K - $10K 4% > $15K 5%$0 EFC 68% Undocumented 1% Expected Family Contribution (EFC) 2 or more races 3% Asian 1% Black or African American 49% Hispanic 46% Undeclared 1% Ethnicity
- 27. Meeting OurCommitments • Starfish • Tableau • SmartSheet • Acrobatiq • D2L • Noel Levitz • IDEA Tools • Early Warning • Intrusive Advising • POD Approach • HP3: Weekly Team Reviews of Std. Dashboard • Program Dash & Annual Rpts. Processes • Increased retention • Affordable, high-quality education Commitment
- 28. Lessons Learned Importance of non-cognitive skills in retention A need to go beyond academic supports Benefits of early intervention and intrusive advising Facilitated by the proper tools It is powerful and sustaining for members of the community to engage together in work
- 29. Keeping our students at the center of our work
- 30. Cleveland State University Peter Meiksins
- 31. CSU in 1991 “We’re an open-access school, with mostly low-income, high-risk, poorly-prepared students. Of course, many of them don’t succeed.”
- 32. CSUToday “We’re doing better. What can we do to improve our completion rates even more?”
- 33. What changed?
- 34. State Funding Model Economic pressure to do better • Presidents did not accept the received wisdom • Faculty and administrators aware of national discussions New Leadership
- 35. It started to work. But most important: We started doing something and…
- 36. Freshman Cohort Retention 6YearTrend (2009-2014) 63.70% 65.90% 64.80% 67.20% 69.70% 70.60% 40.00% 45.00% 50.00% 55.00% 60.00% 65.00% 70.00% 75.00% 80.00% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Percent Retained Fall To Fall
- 37. • Multi-term registration • Early warning/intrusive advising • Hybrid developmental/college-level courses • Math emporium Learnedaboutand implementedbestpractices What Did We Do?
- 38. What did we do? We got organized We invested We used data • Created Student Success Committee (Faculty Senate) • Made Division of Academic Programs responsible for student success efforts (Hired a director of student success programs in that office) • Created dedicated freshman advising staff and transfer advising office to work with new students • Starfish Early Alert • We identified high DFW/high enrollment courses • Made them a target for SI/SLA • Made them Target for Teaching Enhancement grants for innovation
- 39. Still have people to convince Are we done? Need to get better at using data strategically Long list of things we’re planning to implement the next three years
- 40. California Community Colleges Robin Armour
- 42. o 2.1 million students o 113 colleges o Largest higher ed in US o Shared governance o Counseling faculty o Academic freedom o Professional networks o Highest poverty o Highest unemployment o Highest incarcerated o Large urban vs. rural disparities A Large and Complex System Community College in California
- 43. Student-Centric Problem Solving… I’ll just drop this course and worry about the impact later! The course was full or not available! I can’t ever get time with my advisor! I took classes I didn’t need! I changed my major – now major problems! Finish? No idea!
- 44. This has got to be fixed… Student Success Task Force • Multi-disciplined community • 22 recommendations
- 45. o Mandatory core services o Priority enrollment o Major or specific education goal required o Fee waiver tied to academic standards o And the tools and funding to deliver Meaningful changes
- 46. Change in Funding Paradigm Headcount + Services = Favoring Performance $185M to implement core services Orientation, Assessment, Educational Planning Three Initiatives • Online Education Initiative (OEI) • Common Assessment Initiative (CAI) • Education Planning Initiative (EPI)
- 47. • Student Services Portal • Career Exploration • Common Assessment • Orientation • Education Planning • Early Alert • Integration, Training, and Support Statewide Tools and Support
- 48. Timelines and Outcomes Spring 2016 Working Together • Complete pilots with 14 colleges • Implement improvements Summer 2016 Moving Forward • Begin next round of college implementations • Career Exploration tools available • Continue implementations at 60 colleges • Evaluate improvements from baselines Winter 2017- Summer 2018 Making a Difference
- 49. Open Forum Amy Goodburn, University of Nebraska Alison Hilsabeck, National Louis University Peter Meiksins, Cleveland State University Robin Armour, California Community Colleges Stephen M. Smith, Hobsons
Notas do Editor
- Welcome to the audience and to today’s presenters
- Because of workforce needs, students today are facing new (and sometimes exciting) challenges related to postsecondary access and completion.
- Sometimes as K-12 educators we get wrapped up in getting students TO college instead of THROUGH college. Students are not completing degrees at the rate they should be. Especially when you compare this number to (next slide) the need for college-educated workers now and in the future. From NCES – The Condition of Education 2015 “The 2013 6-year graduation rate for first-time, full-time undergraduate students who began their pursuit of a bachelor’s degree at a 4-year degree-granting institution in the fall 2007 was 59 percent. That is, 59 percent of first-time, full-time students who began seeking a bachelor’s degree at a 4-year institution in the fall 2007 completed the degree at that institution by 2013.” “At 2-year degree-granting institutions, 31 percent of full-time, first-time undergraduate students who began their pursuit of a certificate or associate’s degree in fall 2008 attained it within 150 percent of the normal time required to do so. For example, this measure refers to students who were seeking a 2-year associate’s degree and completed the degree within 3 years.
- The Starfish Philosophy: 1. Success is a moving target Because life happens every day, students need different kinds of encouragement at different times. It isn’t enough to survey students and base your intervention efforts on their feelings at that moment. It is also presumptuous to redirect a student away from a lifelong dream because of one poor performance at mid-terms. Students run into trouble for a variety of reasons, including academic challenges, financial concerns, home life struggles, and schedule conflicts – issues that can arise at any time. Your people can help students overcome these obstacles… if they know about them. 2. Success entails academic achievement Ultimately, a student’s classroom performance will determine if he or she persists to the next academic milestone. Gauging this performance is important. Instructors know when a student is struggling but need an efficient, secure way to register their concern with the right person. Some instructors automatically capture performance data in the LMS, online homework systems, and student response systems. Even your busiest instructors will contribute to your student success efforts if the process is easy, reliable, and effective – and if they have confidence that someone on the other end will pick it up. 3. Success requires engagement Students are busier than ever, as are the people who want to help them. It has to be easy for everyone to connect and stay engaged. Students need to know who is available and when. Advisors need to know which students are struggling, and with what issues, so they can prioritize their outreach. And everyone needs a plan to follow, whether specific steps to resolve a concern or to finish a program. 4. Success must be measured As the saying goes, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Seeing the bigger picture involves tying specific activities to outcomes. You are investing money and resources to help students be successful including First Year Experience programs, living learning communities, and tutoring. How does your institutional leadership know what is working? Your institution needs to be able to measure its efforts to optimize further investments.
- Note 68% of our students have $0 EFC and another 21% have an EFC of no more than $5000.
- Existing Student Pop: POD, Starfish, Advisors, LLS, N-L, IDEA HP3: Dashboard development, Student Success Coach, LLS, Teams, Focus Groups Program Metrics – linked to governance review process
- Building a basis for conversation, planning, action. Data profiles for programs; N-L, Retention, Use of Starfish for early warning; Faculty dialogues about students; Rapid improvement: (e.g., Intrusive Advising, Proactive Learning Supports, Acrobatiq “lockdown” in Lab, Peer mentoring) Non cognitive factors: School-life balance – working more than 25 hours per week, childcare/family responsibilities; Mental health concerns – depression, anxiety, feeling of overwhelm Physical health concerns – illness, pregnancy Mindset – not identifying as a college student, lack of motivation Family not supportive or poses a barrier
- AASCU Award Starfish: - 36,400 appointments scheduled – overwhelmingly (60%) by students themselves. - Needs more faculty buy-in – only 30% of lower level class instructors are participating Starfish and Academic Support Services: - Tutoring, SI Sessions, Success Coaching, Writing Center appointments now scheduled in SF (will provide for better assessment) Academic Support Services: TASC - SI and Tutoring served over 1500 students (10 or more meetings means 9.5% higher pass rate compared to those that do not come) - Success Coaching: 170 Writing Center: - Over 1500 students seen, ENG 100: 8+ meetings increases pass rate by 25% Intrusive Advising: New strategies to push students to see their advisors have started paying off: 78% of FY14 were seen in our office (a 16% increase from last year) Expanded to transfers <30 Math and English ENG 101 – Pass Rate increased 14% since inception of SLA (and other changes) MTH – Emporium. Future: Hybrid of developmental and college level? (not sure whether this should be in here) Summer Programming – VABC 91% passed developmental math, participants’ first year retention is 75% New: Inclusion of ASC 101
- Assessing and Targeting intervention predictive analytics, Civitas First Year Review - ASC 101: Review curriculum, targeting class and information to different student populations (e.g. CCP students with credit) Focus on CMSD (have separate slide?) Make up 10% of our incoming freshman class First year retention is 16% lower than the CSU average 6-year graduation rate is 23% lower than the CSU average Interventions made possible by KeyBank. Goal: increase success rate to CSU average
- Sample questions: When implementing new programs focusing on student success, which stakeholders did you find were accelerators and which stakeholders did you view as roadblocks? Have you engaged in off-campus partnerships to help implement student success programming? What are your hopes for the future? What do you hope to add to in terms of student success in the next 10 years? Do you have any advice for those who are just now beginning to implement new, engaging programs focused on student success?