Expanding the First Year Experience

1. Expanding the First Year Experience Kate Otto Indiana University Information Literacy Summit 2016

2. Introduction • University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee • Kansas State University & Polytechnic • Indiana University

3. K-State 1st Year Experience Campus 2025 Plan Institutional Structural Task Force Advising – 70% First Generation Faculty Support (RSCAD) First Year Experience Program Campus need Committee Charge: think outside the box!

4. Guiding Principles • Build Connections • Set Expectations • Challenge while Supporting

5. Comprehensive Experience Journey: • Committee • Research and profile of the student • Requested to attend First Year Experience Conference (Dallas, TX) • Student & Faculty focus groups • Determined First Year was not enough • Identified multi-year approach as best fit for campus needs

6. Comprehensive Experience Research: First Year courses are successful at increasing student satisfaction & retention rates Structured research initiatives are beneficial to overall student success Leadership, professional development, and service learning positively impact job placement, personal fulfillment, and achievement First Year programs are commonplace Few institutions extend First Year initiatives into sophomore and junior academic phases Limited quantitative research exists to support an ongoing First Year initiative

7. Comprehensive Experience Proposal: • uBelong: Orientation component • Transition to college, plan the experience, connect with resources, build a community • uExperience: Freshmen component • Master academic intelligence, know & manage yourself, gain cultural awareness • uResearch (now uDiscover): Sophomore component • Develop information literacy skills, discover library resources in-depth, create annonated bibliography, support a high quality undergraduate research culture • uEngage: Junior component • Hone professional skills, prepare the culminating experience, conduct program-related research, connect with industry, plan professional direction

8. Comprehensive Experience Supplementary Parts: ePortfolio Enhance job placement Faculty adoption and consistent use Assessment aid Digital Repository Our Story website Fosters community Showcases and supports research efforts

10. Comprehensive experience Plan in Action: • Communication • Campus buy-in • Transparency – scheduled standing meetings open to campus • Created a website • Workshops for specific components (i.e. ePortfolios) • Attending faculty meetings • Sub-Committees • For each component • Invited critical parties for input (strategically formed diverse committees) • Integrated Assessment with Advising

11. Comprehensive experience Logistics: • Required/tracked through a hold • Waiver of participation • 8 peer mentors, ~85 students • Scripted

12. Comprehensive experience uResearch: Information Literacy 2 faculty/2 staff Building Curriculum Converted previous FY Seminars Specific campus need uEngage more specific

13. Comprehensive experience Takeaways: Intentional, regular communication Location matters Be adaptable, open-minded Refer to research and data Build on strengths Obtain continuous feedback

14. Bridging the Experience UW Milwaukee • Student makeup • LEAP • Scaffold information literacy • Wide-spanning course

15. Lupton & Bruce (2010) Information Literacy (GeST) Perspectives: • Generic • How we manage information • Basic steps of research process – where things are, what to do next • Situational • Relationally based approaches within contexts • Relate research process to their lives • Transformative • Take a critical approach, global/social • Become apart of a scholarly conversation with intention Learning Theory

16. Course Information Literacy • Collaborate creating syllabus • Game Plan response required • Embed in course management system • Manage weekly reflection in discussion D2L • Discussion board for questions • Access to paper submissions/bibliographies • Follow-up session • Consider how to include the library in course activities • Faculty/Department workshops • Satisfaction surveys, pre & post tests

17. Assessment Outcome example: Students will be able to determine if sources are scholarly or suitable for their research purpose in order to accurately evaluate sources. Direct Measure: On a D2L course discussion board include a question such as “Please list a minimum of 8 qualities of a scholarly source.” Outcome example: Students will choose a thoughtful research question and create a substantial list of appropriate keywords (4-12) in order to appropriately map out the first stage of the research process. Direct Measure: Game Plan submissions

18. Bridging the Experience • Indiana University student makeup • Community/retention • Engaged and global citizen • Outreach & Programming • Learning Commons Librarian • Indiana University information literacy • Information Literacy workshops observer

19. Questions/Discussion

20. Works cited Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education. (2013). Academic advising programs: CAS standards and guidelines. Retrieved from NACADA Clearinghouse of Academic Advising Resources Web Site: http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/View-Articles/CAS-Advising-Standards.aspx Gordon, V.N., Habley, W.R., Grites, T.J., and Associates. (2008). Academic advising: A comprehensive handbook (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kent State University. (2014). Explore Programs and Degrees. Retrieved from http://solutions.kent.edu/GPS/ROADMAP/browse/all Upcraft, M.L., Gardner, J.N., Barefoot, B.O., & Associates. (2005). Challenging & supporting the first-year student: A handbook for improving the first year of college. San Francisco: Jossey-Boss. “Improving student retention and graduation rates,” (2011), Hanover Research, 3-4, retrieved from http://www.mybrcc.edu/intranet/attachments/article/110/Improving%20Student%20Retention%20and%20Graduation%20Rates.pdf Kuh, G. D. (2008), High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter, Association ofAmerican Colleges and Universities. “First-year persistence and retention rates by starting enrollment intensity: 2009-2012” (2014), from Snapshot Report, National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, retrieved from http://nscresearchcenter.org/snapshotreport-persistenceretention14/ Nelson, A. (2014), “Build a road map for sophomore enrichment & launch a pathway for academic success,” 2014 KASADA Conference (proceedings), http://www2.kent.edu/academics/resources/kasada/upload/Build-a-Road-Map-Sophomore-KASADA-Conference-2014.pdf, and Schreiner, L. (2001), Taking Retention to the Next Level: Of Strengths and sophomores, Washington, D.C.: Council for Christian Colleges & Universities. Lincoln University Sophomore Year Experience (2014), Lincoln University of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, http://www.lincoln.edu/studentservices/sye/index.html Student Affairs (2014), Fort Hays University 2009-2015, http://www.fhsu.edu/studentaffairs/