1. Why Learning Communities Work: A DEEPer Look at Effective Educational Practice George D. Kuh Center for Postsecondary Research Indiana University Bloomington November 16, 2004

2. Student Engagement Quiz True or False? More first-year students at research universities participate in learning communities than their peers at liberal arts colleges. True (15% vs. 9%)

3. Student Engagement Quiz True or False? More students at research universities do community service as part of a class than students attending liberal arts colleges. False (47% vs. 37%)

4. We all want the same thing— an undergraduate experience that results in high levels of learning and personal development for all students.

5. Overview  Effective Educational Practice  NSSE Framework and Status  What We’ve Learned  Implications

6. Points to Ponder Points to Ponder  What are we trying to accomplish with living-learning environments?  What makes for an educationally effective living-learning environment?  What would be persuasive evidence that we are accomplishing our intended purposes?  What would be useful data for improving our programs?

7. What Matters to Student Success Lessons from the research

8. Lessons from the Research  What matters most to desired outcomes is what students do, not who they are  A key factor for student learning is the quality of effort students devote to educationally purposeful activities

9. What Really Matters in College: Student Engagement “The research is unequivocal: students who are actively involved in both academic and out-of-class activities gain more from the college experience than those who are not so involved.” Ernest T. Pascarella & Patrick T. Terenzini, How College Affects Students

10. Lessons from the Research  What matters most is what students do, not who they are  A key factor is the quality of effort students expend  Educationally effective institutions channel student energy toward the right activities

11. Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education (Chickering & Gamson, 1987)  Student-faculty contact  Active learning  Prompt feedback  High expectations  Respect for diverse learning styles  Cooperation among students  Time on task

12. Student Engagement Quiz What percent of full-time students study two hours or more for every hour in class? (a) 14% (b) 24% (c) 31% (d) 39% (e) 49% a. 14%

13. Two Components of Student Engagement 1.What students do – T ime and energy devoted to educationally purposeful activities 2.What institutions do – Effective educational practices to induce students to do the right things

14. Worth Pondering  We value what we measure  Therefore, we should carefully decide what to measure and make certain it comports with our institutional mission, values, and desired outcomes.

15. Types of Measures  Outcomes measures  Evidence of what students have learned or can do  Process Measures  Evidence of effective educational activity by students and institutions

16. Evidence of Student Engagement To what extent do students engage in effective educational practices?

17. National Survey of Student Engagement (pronounced “nessie”) Community College Survey of Student Engagement (pronounced “sessie”) College student surveys that assess the extent to which students engage in educational practices associated with high levels of learning and development

18. NSSE Project Scope  620,000 students from 850+ different schools  68% of 4-yr undergraduate FTE  50 states, Puerto Rico, Canada  70+ consortia

19. The College Student Report Student Behaviors Institutional Actions & Requirements Reactions to College Student Background Information Student Learning & Development

20. In your experience at your institution during the current school year, about how often have you done each of the following? 1

24. Effective Educational Practices Level of Academic Challenge Active & Collaborative Learning Enriching Educational Experiences SupportiveCampusEnvironment Student Faculty Interaction

25. What have we learned so far from NSSE? What have we learned so far from NSSE?

26. Grades, persistence, and engagement go hand in hand

28. GPA & Student-Faculty Interaction GPA & Student-Faculty Interaction Regression: Random Intercepts and Slopes Model Interaction with Faculty GPA

29. What percent of first-year students never discuss ideas outside of class with a faculty member? (a) 14% (b) 19% (c) 30% (d) 44% (e) 55% d.44% d. 44% Student Engagement Quiz

30. Prompt Feedback FACULTY gave prompt feedback often or very often STUDENTS received prompt feedback often or very often 92% | 92% Lower Division Upper Division 52% / 64% 1 st yr. Students Seniors

32. Does institutional size matter to engagement? Yes, size matters. Smaller is generally better.

33. Benchmark Scores for All Students by Undergraduate Enrollment

34. Academic Challenge, Active Learning, Student-Faculty Interaction by Enrollment

35. Student engagement varies more within than between institutions.

38. Worth Pondering  How do we reach our least engaged students?

39. Who’s more engaged? Who’s more engaged?  Women  Fraternity & sorority members  Full-time students  Students who live on campus  Students with diversity experiences  Learning community students

40. Experiences with Diversity

41. Who is likely to participate in LCs? Both classes: Non-transfer, minority, Greek, fulltime students, and pre- professional and 2+ majors Both classes: Non-transfer, minority, Greek, fulltime students, and pre- professional and 2+ majors 1 st year: low parent education, living on campus 1 st year: low parent education, living on campus Senior: women Senior: women

42. Benefits of Learning Communities  Academic Performance SAT/ACT SAT/ACT Grades without controls Grades without controls Grades with pre-college controls Grades with pre-college controls

43. Benefits of Learning Communities  Engagement  Quality of Campus Environment  Learning Outcomes  First-year vs. Senior

44. Effects of Learning Communities on Engagement

45. What major public research university ranks in the top 10 among its peers in terms of external grants and contracts but also did six major studies of the quality of the undergraduate experience of its students since 1986? University of Michigan

46. Project DEEP Project DEEP To discover, document and describe what high performing institutions do and how they achieved this level of effectiveness.

47. DEEP Selection Criteria Controlling for student and institutional characteristics (i.e., selectivity, diversity, institutional type), DEEP schools have:  Higher-than-predicted graduation rates  Higher-than-predicted NSSE scores Region and institutional type, special mission type, special mission

48. Project DEEP Partners

49. DEEP Guiding Questions:  What do high-performing colleges and universities do to promote student success?  What campus features -- policies, programs, and practices -- contribute to high levels of engagement and better than predicted graduation rates?

50. Project DEEP* Doctoral Extensives University of Kansas University of Kansas University of Michigan University of Michigan Doctoral Intensives George Mason University Miami University (Ohio) University of Texas El Paso Master’s Granting Fayetteville State University Fayetteville State University Gonzaga University Gonzaga University Longwood University Longwood University Liberal Arts California State, Monterey Bay California State, Monterey Bay Macalester College Macalester College Sweet Briar College Sweet Briar College The Evergreen State College The Evergreen State College University of the South University of the South Ursinus College Ursinus College Wabash College Wabash College Wheaton College (MA) Wheaton College (MA) Wofford College Wofford College Baccalaureate General Alverno College Alverno College University of Maine at Farmington University of Maine at Farmington Winston-Salem State University Winston-Salem State University * Selection criteria: Higher-than-predicted graduation rates; Higher-than- predicted student engagement scores

51. Research Approach  Case study method Team of 24 researchers review institutional documents and conduct multiple-day site visits Team of 24 researchers review institutional documents and conduct multiple-day site visits Observe individuals, classes, group meetings, activities, events Observe individuals, classes, group meetings, activities, events Discover and describe effective practices and programs, campus culture Discover and describe effective practices and programs, campus culture  Roundtables conducted by AAHE to explore uses of NSSE data for improvement of student learning

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

53. Hay muchas maneras de matar pulgas There are many ways to kill fleas

54. Worth Noting  Many roads to an engaging institution  No one best model  Different combinations of complementary, interactive, synergistic conditions  Anything worth doing is worth doing well at scale

55. Lessons Unshakeable Focus on Student Learning  Student learning and personal development are high priorities.  Bent toward engaging pedagogies  “Cool passion” for talent development (students, faculty, staff)  Making time for students  Recruit and reward faculty and staff committed to pedagogical experimentation

56. Unshakeable Focus on Student Learning  Accommodate students’ preferred learning styles  Faculty and administrators challenge students with high standards  “Work with the students we have,” in contrast to focusing only on the best and the brightest Lessons

57. Learning Intensive Practices University of Texas at El Paso uses learning communities and course-based service learning and volunteerism to actively engage its mostly commuter, first-generation students.

58. Learning-intensive practices  CSUMB and George Mason require every student to take from 1-3 writing-intensive courses. They along with most DEEP schools have strong writing centers to emphasize and support the importance of good writing.

59. Ample applied learning opportunities  University of Maine at Farmington’s Student Work Initiative employs students in meaningful work in student services, laboratories, and field-research. Such experiences provide opportunities to apply what they are learning to practical, real-life situations.

60. Lessons Clearly Marked Pathways to Student Success  Make plain to students the resources and services available to help them succeed.  Some guideposts tied directly to the academic program; others related to student and campus culture.  Institutional publications accurately describe what students experience.

61. Clearly Marked Pathways to Student Success  Efforts tailored to student needs.  Mutually reinforcing student expectations and behavior, institutional expectations, and institutional reward systems.  Redundant early warning systems and safety nets  High quality living environments Lessons

62. Examples  Sweet Briar – “intentionally residential”  Ursinus – Common Intellectual Experience and “frosh clustering”  Wofford – preceptors  Michigan – 11 LLCs, WISE, MCSP  Fayetteville State – “Suite Talks”  Sewanee – no cable tv  Macalester – “it’s what we don’t have

63. Intentional acculturation  Miami (Ohio) created the First Year Experience (FYE) Committee to explore ways to enhance the holistic FYE. Means to achieve their goals include (1) Miami Plan Foundation courses taught by full- time faculty; (2) optional first-year seminars; (3) community living options that emphasize leadership and service; and (4) cultural, intellectual, and arts events.

64. “You confront so many different people and so many different views… It really enhances the learning environment because you don’t just learn in the classroom… California State University Monterey Bay student

65. Questions & Discussion

66. For More Information NSSE website: http://www.iub.edu/~nsse