2012 national survey of student engagement jeremy d penn john d hathcoat
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
2012 National Survey of Student Engagement Jeremy D. Penn & John D. Hathcoat

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 32

2012 National Survey of Student Engagement Jeremy D. Penn & John D. Hathcoat - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 62 Views
  • Uploaded on

2012 National Survey of Student Engagement Jeremy D. Penn & John D. Hathcoat. Opening Discussion. What mattered MOST to your success in college as an undergraduate? What should all OSU students do or experience before they graduate?. Overview. Purpose and methodology

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' 2012 National Survey of Student Engagement Jeremy D. Penn & John D. Hathcoat' - idana


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
2012 national survey of student engagement jeremy d penn john d hathcoat
2012 National Survey of Student Engagement

Jeremy D. Penn & John D. Hathcoat

opening discussion
Opening Discussion
  • What mattered MOST to your success in college as an undergraduate?
  • What should all OSU students do or experience before they graduate?
overview
Overview
  • Purpose and methodology
  • Demographic characteristics
  • Benchmark comparisons
  • Comparisons across time
  • Expectation gap (BCSSE & NSSE)
slide4

College Experience

Peer Environment

Individual Student Experiences

Organizational Context

Classroom Experiences

Structures policies & practices

Student learning and persistence

Student Precollege Characteristics and Experiences

Out-of-Class Experiences

Faculty culture

Curricular Experiences

Influences on Student Learning and Persistence

From Reason, Terenzini, and Domingo (2006, p. 154).

summary
Summary

Purpose – national survey aiming to assess the academic engagement of first-year students and seniors.

Methodology – web surveys were administered during Spring 2012 by NSSE Institute.

benchmark comparisons
Benchmark Comparisons

Aspirational Institutions

Less Competitive

Similar

level of academic challenge
Level of Academic Challenge

Items– paper more than 20 pages, number of assigned books/readings; emphasis of applying theories to new situations.

Freshmen– significantly lower than aspirational (d = -.20).

Seniors – significantly lower than all other groups (d = -.16, -.20, and -.18)

active and collaborative learning
Active and Collaborative Learning

Items – class presentation, worked with others, ask questions, class discussion, sought tutoring, taught others.

Freshmen – lower than aspirational (d = -.14)

Senior – not different from all other groups

student faculty interaction
Student Faculty Interaction

Items – project with faculty, faculty feedback, discuss assignments/grades.

Freshmen – higher than peers (d = .14).

Senior – lower than aspirational (d = -.07).

enriching educational experiences
Enriching Educational Experiences

Items – hours in co-curricular activities, community service, culminating senior experience, serious conversations with students of different race/ethnicity

Freshmen – lower than aspirational (d = -.22) and peers (d = -.15).

Seniors – lower than aspirational (d = -.24), higher than less comp (d = .21) and not different from peers.

supportive campus environment
Supportive Campus Environment

Items – campus provides support to succeed academically, quality of relationships with students, administration, etc.

Freshmen – higher than aspirational (d = .13), less comp (d = .17) and peers (d = .15).

Seniors – higher than peer (d = .08)

benchmark summary discussion
Benchmark Summary Discussion
  • Level of academic challenge continues to be a concern (also a concern in 2009, 2005, and 2002)
  • Supportive campus environment is improved over 2009 results
  • What do the results so far suggest about students’ experiences at OSU?
  • What changes might be made at OSU in response to these results?
expectation gap
Expectation Gap

2011 BCCSE – survey of beginning college students to provide information on how incoming freshmen expected to engage at OSU.

Cross-sectional comparisons between BCSSE and NSSE allows us to infer gaps between “expected” and “actual” engagement.

how are some campuses responding
How are some campuses responding?
  • Undergraduate research
  • Learning communities
  • Service learning
  • Writing-intensive courses
  • Capstone experiences
  • Common intellectual experiences (a “core”)
  • Collaborative assignments and projects
  • Diversity / global learning
high impact practices should not be just for honors students
High impact practices should not be just for honors students

“historically underserved students tend to benefit more from engaging in educational purposeful activities [such as high impact practices] than majority students” (p. 17)

-Recommends participation in at least two high-impact activities for all students

discussion
Discussion
  • What is the next step for improving engagement at OSU?
  • What can / will you do in your role at OSU to improve student engagement?
ad