Academic Staff Senate Presentation March 17, 2014

1. Academic Staff Senate Presentation March 17, 2014

2. Presentation Overview • Purpose of this Presentation • Interpreting NSSE Results • NSSE Administration • Selected UW-Platteville NSSE 2013 Results • Institutional Satisfaction • Engagement Indicators • Item Comparisons • Proposed Institutional Response • Questions & Discussion

3. Purpose of this Presentation

4. Academic Staff Senate Presentation • Further disseminate the results of an institutional measure • Given time, only giving ‘macro’ and select ‘drill-down’ views of the results • Draw attention to NSSE results across the institution • Promote the Improvement of Learning’s endorsed Institutional Response

5. Interpreting NSSE Results

6. Interpreting NSSE Results • These are students’ self-report of their perceptions, experiences and plans.

7. Interpreting NSSE Results • These are students’ self-report of their perceptions, experiences and plans. • This is designed to be a measure of the INSTITUTION.

8. Interpreting NSSE Results • These are students’ self-report of their perceptions, experiences and plans. • This is designed to be a measure of the INSTITUTION. • In comparing, outliers cancel each other out.

9. How do we choose our targets?

10. How do we choose our targets?

11. Interpreting NSSE Results • P-values indicate whether there is a statistically significant difference between the two means being compared. • *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

12. Interpreting NSSE Results • P-values indicate whether there is a statistically significant difference between the two means being compared. • *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 • Effect sizes indicate how meaningful that difference is in standard deviations. (Cohen’s d) • Small = .10 • Medium = .30 • Large = .50

13. NSSE Administration

14. Survey Administration • Census-administered first-year & senior students • Spring administration • Multiple follow-ups to increase response rates • Additional Modules provide option to delve deeper into the student experience • Experiences with Diverse Perspectives • Experiences with Writing

15. A Commitment to Data Quality NSSE’s Psychometric Portfolio presents evidence of validity, reliability, and other indicators of data quality. It serves higher education leaders, researchers, and professionals who use NSSE. See the Psychometric Portfolio nsse.iub.edu/links/psychometric_portfolio

16. NSSE 2013 U.S. Institution Response Rates UW-Platteville’s response rate = 30% NSSE 2013 U.S. Institutional Response Rates All NSSE 2013 institutions = 30%

17. NSSE 2013 U.S. Institution Response Rates UW-Platteville’s response rate = 30% NSSE 2013 U.S. Institutional Response Rates All NSSE 2013 institutions = 30%

18. Respondents to NSSE • First-Year Students • 1461 sampled • 406 responded • 28% Response Rate • Senior Students • 1501 sampled • 489 responded • 33% Response Rate

19. Response Rate Implications • Sampling Error • First-Year: +/- 4.1% • Senior: +/- 3.6% • Weighting • Due to overrepresentation in respondents • Full-time Students • Female Students

20. Selected UW-PlattevilleNSSE 2013 Results

21. Results to be Covered • Institutional Satisfaction • Satisfaction with Educational Experience • Would they choose go to UW-Platteville again? • Engagement Indicators • 10 of them • What is driving them in the direction they’re in • Item Comparisons

22. National Comparison Group consists of…

23. National Comparison Group (1-6 of 17) • Armstrong Atlantic State University (Savannah, GA) • Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania (Bloomsburg, PA) • California University of Pennsylvania (California, PA) • Clarion University of Pennsylvania (Clarion, PA) • East Stroudsburg University of Pennsylvania (East Stroudsburg, PA) • Eastern Illinois University (Charleston, IL)

24. National Comparison Group (7-12 of 17) • EdinboroUniversity of Pennsylvania (Edinboro, PA) • Kutztown University of Pennsylvania (Kutztown, PA) • Millersville University of Pennsylvania (Millersville, PA) • Pittsburg State University (Pittsburg, KS) • Southern Connecticut State University (New Haven, CT) • Southern Utah University (Cedar City, UT)

25. National Comparison Group (13-17 of 17) • University of Central Missouri (Warrensburg, MO) • University of Michigan-Flint (Flint, MI) • University of Nebraska at Kearney (Kearney, NE) • University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, The (Chattanooga, TN) • West Texas A&M University (Canyon, TX)

26. Satisfaction with “Entire Educational Experience” at UW-Platteville

27. Satisfaction with “Entire Educational Experience” at UW-Platteville

28. Satisfaction with “Entire Educational Experience” at UW-Platteville • “How would you evaluate your entire educational experience at this institution?” (Seniors)

29. Satisfaction with “Entire Educational Experience” at UW-Platteville • “How would you evaluate your entire educational experience at this institution?” (Seniors)

30. Satisfaction with UW-Platteville

31. Satisfaction with UW-Platteville • “If you could start over again, would you go to the same institution you are now attending?” (Seniors)

32. Satisfaction with UW-Platteville • “If you could start over again, would you go to the same institution you are now attending?” (Seniors)

33. NSSE Engagement Indicators Learning Strategies Quantitative Reasoning Reflective & Integrative Learning Theme: Academic Challenge Higher-Order Learning Student – Faculty Interaction

34. NSSE Engagement Indicators Meaningful Academic Engagement Themes Academic Challenge Learning Strategies Quantitative Reasoning Reflective & Integrative Learning Theme: Academic Challenge Learning with Peers Higher-Order Learning Experiences with Faculty Student – Faculty Interaction Campus Environment

35. NSSE Engagement Indicators Engagement Indicators Meaningful Academic Engagement Themes Academic Challenge Learning Strategies Quantitative Reasoning Reflective & Integrative Learning Theme: Academic Challenge Learning with Peers Higher-Order Learning Experiences with Faculty Student – Faculty Interaction Campus Environment

36. Overall results compared to peer group for each Engagement Indicator. Engagement Indicators

37. Seniors’ Engagement Indicators

38. Seniors’ Engagement Indicators

39. Higher Order Learning (4) • During the current school year, how much has your coursework emphasized the following? Back

40. Reflective & Integrative Learning (7) • During the current school year, about how often have you done the following?

41. Reflective & Integrative Learning (cont’d) Back

42. Learning Strategies (3) • During the current school year, about how often have you done the following? Back

43. Quantitative Reasoning (3) • During the current school year, how often have you done the following? Back

44. Collaborative Learning (4) • During the current school year, about how often have you done the following? Back

45. Discussions with Diverse Others (4) • During the current school year, about how often have you had discussions with people from the following groups? Back

46. Student-Faculty Interaction (4) • During the current school year, about how often have you done the following? Back

47. Effective Teaching Practices (5) • During the current school year, to what extent have your instructors done the following? Back

48. Quality of Interactions (5) • Indicate the quality of your interactions with the following people at your institution Back

49. Supportive Environment (8) • How much does your institution emphasize the following?

50. Supportive Environment (cont’d) Back