1. The Power of Partnerships: Lessons for Higher Education John N. Gardner

2. The Odyssey of a Typical University Professor

3. Two Decades of Leadership for First-Year Efforts Thrust into University 101 leadership University101: a vehicle for the creation of partnerships Academic affairs and student affairs working together to support the academic mission Collaborating to define first-year student success

4. This broad definition of first-year student success is achievable only through partnerships. Academic Success/GPA Relationships Identity Development Career Decision Making Health & Wellness Faith & Spirituality Multicultural Awareness Civic Responsibility Retention – the baseline

5. Key Assumptions The greatest influence on new students is that of other students. Learning takes place anywhere there are students, faculty and staff members interacting. We are more likely to achieve student success through partnerships that integrate learning, both inside and outside the curriculum. The preeminent goal of partnerships is academic success.

6. Elements of a Student Success Partnership A shared vision, jointly developed, for student success Shared resources – including personnel and money Joint reporting lines Functional integration; curricular/ co-curricular integration A willingness to ask for and offer help A willingness to share responsibility, credit, and blame

7. Elements of Partnerships Big picture thinking A capacity for organizational unselfishness A willingness to come together for what’s best for students, the institution, my unit, and others we serve A willingness to plant the seed and let others run with it (and even take credit)

8. Official, Formalized Components Formal agreements based on informal understandings A plan for public dissemination and assessment of partnership agreements A connection of the agreements to the institution’s mission statement and strategic plan

9. Elements of Partnerships A willingness to give up something you started when it needs to be institutionalized somewhere else Getting people to work together who ordinarily would not interact with each other A decided preference for collaboration over competition

10. Practical Advantages of Partnerships More available resources – people and money Each unit gets the benefits of talents, skills, capacity and political support it wouldn’t have on its own Reduces or eliminates unnecessary duplication and waste of resources Is a model of best practice for illustration and emulation Teaches students by example Student success more likely to be the outcome

11. Partnerships to Enhance Student Success Academic & Student Affairs Leaders’ Institute 2012 Jillian Kinzie, Associate Director Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research and NSSE nsse.iub.edu

12. Interdependent View of Undergraduate Education 12 Undergraduate Education Experience Intellectual Development Social/Emotiona l Development Transformative Education

13. Interdependent View Propositions: Believe: – Students whole collegiate experience provides a platform for learning – Learning is holistic, outcomes cross the cognitive-affective domain – Student success is everyone’s business Requires: – Acknowledging many ways of learning – Synergistic relationships across institutional divisions – Undo false dichotomies

14. 14 Faculty – attending to students intellectual development Student Affairs – focusing on students’ social & emotional development Cognitive Affective Divide

15. Plotting A Course to Partnerships Ways must be found to overcome the artificial, organizational bifurcation of our educational delivery systems – P. Terenzini 15

16. Partnership Lessons from Educationally Effective and Improving Institutions 1.Project DEEP – studied 20 high- performing institutions to document educational effectiveness a.Project DEEP 5 year follow-up – what sustains educational effectiveness? 2.Learning to Improve – identify factors fostering institutional improvement 16

17. Project DEEP: A study of 20 High- Performing Institutions What do educationally effective institutions do to foster student engagement and success?

18. Six Shared Conditions of Educationally Effective Institutions 1.“ Living ” Mission and “ Lived ” Educational Philosophy 2.Unshakeable Focus on Student Learning 3.Environments Adapted for Educational Enrichment 4.Clearly Marked Pathways to Student Success 5.Improvement-Oriented Ethos 6.Shared Responsibility for Educational Quality

19. Shared Responsibility for Educational Quality Students, all staff, and faculty are partners in educating students Faculty & student affairs educators fuel the collaborative spirit Caring, supportive community 19

20. SSiC Follow Up: Educational Effectiveness - Guaranteed to Last? Checked back with DEEP schools 5 years later… NSSE results about the same – a few slips, a few gains Graduation rates comparable, or better - 7 schools increased by 6%, & 3 by 10% Six shared conditions still hold

21. a. Student success is an institutional priority when everyone--especially campus leaders--make it so. b. Stay “positively restless” – pay attention to data that matters for student success c. Enhanced partnerships between student and academic affairs Keys to Sustaining the Student Success Agenda 21

22. 22  1,500 baccalaureate institutions in NSSE 2000- 2011  600 institutions administered NSSE 4+ times  OPPORTUNITY: What can we learn about institutional improvement and change? Studying Quality Improvement

23. Are Institutions Improving? Yes. 23 University of Texas-San Antonio

24. Conditions that Fostered Improvement 1.Grants, Pilots, External Initiatives 2.Stability & Trust in Leadership 3.Physical space/creation of new learning spaces 4.Comprehensive & Targeted strategic planning 5.Data Informed & Culture of continuous improvement 6.Strong role of faculty – impact of generational change 7.Intentional partnerships in administrative areas – Student and Academic Affairs

25. Partnerships: First-Year Focus “We have always done a lot to help students stay in college and think about how we move students out successfully.” -- Lynchburg College faculty member Low persistence rate in 2005 captured everyone’s attention… formed Student Success Team Sent dozens faculty & staff to FYE conference 25

26. Robust Partnerships Between Student & Academic Affairs Change facilitated by a robust partnership between academic & student affairs

27. Perplexing Question: If partnerships are so essential to educational effectiveness and improved conditions for learning and success, then why are they so difficult to achieve? Why are partnerships the exception rather than the rule? 27

28. Exploring Partnerships: Lessons Learned Charles Schroeder

29. Context: 1992 University of Missouri Major Triggering Events Declining enrollment…huge drop in freshman class (-29%) & residence hall occupancy down 34% (6200 to 4100). Three large residence halls closed…debt rating in jeopardy Course availability / scheduling a challenge Poor legislative relationships…skepticism / anger CBHE establishes new retention (R) / graduation (G) rate standards … R=85% vs. 78%; G= 65% vs. 59% Finding opportunity in adversity !

30. Compelling Aim New Chancellor establishes a compelling aim: “Recapture the public’s trust by rededicating the University to high quality undergraduate education”

31. Goals and objectives Restore enrollment and residence hall occupancy. Improve course scheduling through more effective curriculum management for first-year students. Elevate the intellectual climate of the campus by enhancing first-year student engagement. Achieve the new CBHE retention / graduation rate standards by 1998 And, by the way, do all of this with limited funding!!!!

32. Primary strategy: Create a residential learning community program Three institutional leaders : VPSA; Associate Dean A&S; Chair Biology Dept. Cross-functional core team: residence life; registrar; English department; admissions & campus writing program Developed 12 FIGS (Freshman Interest Groups) … three common courses & common assignment to floors. Initial assessment led to creation of three residential colleges, 87 FIGs and 46 sponsored learning communities by 1999 (“70 by 99”).

33. Program Outcomes Achieved CBHE performance standards (G=68%; R=85%) Increased enrollment & filled the residence halls Much higher NSSE scores on all five benchmarks 70% (4200) of all first-year students now in learning communities LC`s the “signature program” of MU-- 7%+ to graduation Graduation rates of “at-risk students” (family income <48,000 and HSGPA < 2.75) FIG vs. non-FIG 45.6% vs. 34.2 % + 11.4%

34. Lessons learned Triggering events and “self-interests” can be catalysts … focus on issues of consequence! A shared vision and shared resources are critical Understanding and acceptance of differences are key (i.e. using and integrating the strengths of partners) Communicate, coordinate, collaborate constantly! Leadership is critical: Think big…plan long term Be flexible…adapt as necessary and take risks Examine prevailing mental models and embrace the notion “To create the future, challenge the past”