1. The University of Texas-Pan American National Survey of Student Engagement 2005 Results & Recommendations Presented by: November, 2005 S. J. Sethi, Ph.D. Assistant Director Office of Institutional Research & Effectiveness

2. Overview What is NSSE? Its Purpose and Uses What does Research Show? NSSE Survey Results for UTPA Recommendations

3. What is the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)? (pronounced “nessie”)  National survey that assesses the extent to which first-year and senior students engage in educational practices associated with high levels of learning and development.  Supported by grants from Lumina Foundation for Education and the Center of Inquiry in the Liberal Arts at Wabash College.  Co-sponsored by The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and The Pew Forum on Undergraduate Learning.

4. Purpose of NSSE  Measure how well we are doing.  Provide a new way to look at teaching & learning.  Determine if student behavior and institutional practices are headed in the right direction.  Assist in measuring the extent to which the university advances polices and practices that encourage student learning and development.

5. Uses of NSSE Data  Inform legislators & accreditation teams on what we do best to promote student development.  Look into processes on campus that might lead to increased student engagement.  Foster institutional improvement initiatives.  Promote effective educational practices.  Zero in on factors that contribute to positive experience for students.

6. What does Research Show? “Students who are actively involved in both academic and out-of-class activities gain more from the college experience than those not so involved.” Pascarella and Terenzini, “How college affects students: Findings and insights from twenty years of research.” “Engagement is a critical factor in the educational process because the more time and energy students devote to desired activities, the more likely they are to develop the habits of the mind that are key to success after college.” George Kuh, NSSE director, Indiana University Bloomington.

7. Who Participated Nationally More than 750 different colleges/universities since 2000 50 states, DC, Puerto Rico and Canada 500+ institutions in 2005 Data from more than 560,000 students in 2005 Year Colleges/ Universities 2000276 2001321 2002366 2003437 2004473 2005500+

8. 6 Year Response Rates 200020012002200320042005 UTPA34%29%35%30%35%29% UT System---34%32%27% Master’s Institutions 42%43%39%42%36%35% NSSE Nationwide 42% 41%43%38%37%

9. NSSE Survey Results for UTPA 5 Areas of Effective Educational Practice Level of Academic Challenge Active and Collaborative Learning Student-Faculty Interactions Enriching Educational Experiences Supportive Campus Environment

10. Class preparation. Coursework emphasis on analysis, synthesis, making judgments, application of theories or concepts. Level of work necessary to meet instructor’s expectations. Campus emphasis on study time and academic work. Number of assigned textbooks, etc. Number of written papers of 20+ pages; 5-19 pages, 1-5 pages. Academic Challenge Cluster Questions Include:

11. Level of Academic Challenge: Score Comparisons UTPAUT-SystemMaster’sNationalUTPAUT-SystemMaster’sNational

12. Level of Academic Challenge: Score Comparisons Freshmen Seniors

13. Level of Academic Challenge: 2005 vs. 2001 (Statistically significant differences between UTPA and other Master’s Level Institutions) 20052001 Had fewer assigned textbooks & course readings Had fewer assigned textbooks & course readings (Freshmen only) Worked on more written papers or reports of 20 pages or more - Worked on fewer written papers or reports of 5-19 pages Worked on fewer written papers or reports of reports 5-19 pages (Freshmen only) Worked on fewer written papers or reports of less than 5 pages Worked on fewer written papers or reports of less than 5 pages (Freshmen only) Spent less time on preparing for class Spent less time on preparing for class (Freshmen only)

14. Class participation Class presentations Working with other students on projects Tutoring/teaching other students Participation in community-based project as part of course Discussion of ideas from readings/courses outside of class Active and Collaborative Learning Cluster Questions Include:

15. Active and Collaborative Learning: Score Comparisons UTPAUT-SystemMaster’sNational UTPAUT-SystemMaster’sNational

16. Active and Collaborative Learning: Score Comparisons Freshmen Seniors

17. Active & Collaborative Learning: 2005 vs. 2001 (Statistically significant differences between UTPA and other Master’s Level Institutions) 20052001 Made more presentations in class (Seniors only) Made fewer presentations in class (Freshmen only) Asked fewer questions in class or contributed to class discussions - Participated less in a community- based project as part of a regular course (Freshmen only) Worked more with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments Worked less with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments (Freshmen only) Tutored or taught other students more (paid or voluntary) (Freshmen only) -

18. Student-Faculty Interaction Cluster Includes Questions on: Discussing grades/assignments with instructor Discussing career plans with faculty member/advisor Discussing class work with faculty outside of class Working with faculty on university activities other than coursework Receiving prompt feedback from faculty on academic performance Working with faculty on research project outside of course requirements

19. Student-Faculty Interaction: Score Comparisons UTPAUT-SystemMaster’sNationalUTPAUT-SystemMaster’sNational

20. Student-Faculty Interaction: Score Comparisons Freshmen Seniors

21. Student Faculty Interaction: 2005 vs. 20010 (Statistically significant differences between UTPA and other Master’s Level Institutions) 20052001 More students discussed grades or assignments with an instructor (Freshmen only) - Students do not receive prompt feedback from faculty on their academic performance - Work significantly less with faculty members on activities other than coursework (committees, student life activities, etc.) (Seniors only) Fewer students use email to communicate with an instructor (Seniors only) Fewer students use email to communicate with an instructor

22. Enriching Educational Experiences Cluster Includes Questions on: Co-curricular activities Practicum, internship, clinical assignment, etc. Community service, volunteer Foreign language, study abroad Independent study, self-designed major Culminating senior experience Conversations with students of different beliefs, ethnicity Use of electronic technology to discuss/complete assignments Campus environment that encourages contact among students of different backgrounds.

23. Enriching Educational Experiences: Score Comparisons UTPAUT-SystemMaster’sNational UTPAUT-SystemMaster’sNational

24. Enriching Educational Experiences: Score Comparisons Freshmen Seniors

25. Enriching Educational Experiences: 2005 vs. 2001 20052001 Had fewer serious conversations with students of a different race/ethnicity Had fewer serious conversations with students of a different race/ethnicity (Freshmen only) Had fewer serious conversations with students who are very different in terms of religious beliefs, political opinions, etc. Had fewer serious conversations with students who are very different in terms of religious beliefs, political opinions, etc. (Freshmen only) Participated less in co-curricular activities (organizations, student government, sports, etc.) Had fewer practicum, internships, clinical assignments, etc. (Seniors only) Question not asked in 2001

26. Enriching Educational Experiences: 2005 vs. 2001 (Statistically significant differences between UTPA and other Master’s Level Institutions) 20052001 Did less community service or volunteer work (Seniors only) Question not asked in 2001 Did more foreign language coursework (Freshmen only) Question not asked in 2001 Did less independent study or self- designed major (Seniors only) Question not asked in 2001 Had a less cumulative senior experience (comprehensive exam, thesis, project, etc.) Question not asked in 2001

27. Supportive Campus Environment Cluster Includes Questions on: Campus support for: –academic success –coping with non-academic responsibilities –thriving socially Quality of relationships with other students, faculty members, administrative personnel/offices

28. Supportive Campus Environment : Score Comparisons UTPAUT-SystemMaster’sNationalUTPAUT-SystemMaster’sNational

29. Supportive Campus Environment: Score Comparisons Freshmen Seniors

30. Supportive Campus Environment: 2005 vs. 2001 (Statistically significant differences between UTPA and other Master’s Level Institutions) 20052001 Quality of relationships with other students is significantly better - Quality of relationships with faculty is significantly better (Freshmen only) - Quality of relationships with administrative personnel and offices is significantly better (Seniors only) -

31. Compared to other Master’s level institutions our students: Participate less in physical fitness activities Participate less in activities to enhance their spirituality Spend less time relaxing or socializing (seniors only) Work more for pay off-campus More students provide care for dependents living with them More students commute to class Attend fewer campus events and activities

32. Compared to other Master’s level institutions UTPA has contributed more to the following educational and personal growth experiences: Acquiring a broad general education (Freshmen only) Speaking clearly and effectively Using computing and information technology Working effectively with others (Freshmen only) Voting in local, state, or national elections Learning effectively on one’s own Understanding oneself and people of other racial/ethnic backgrounds (Freshmen only) Solving complex real-world problems Developing a personal code of values and ethics (Freshmen only)

33. Recommendations Focus on the areas of:  Academic challenge  Student-faculty interactions (more for Seniors)  Enriching educational experiences (more for seniors)

34. Recommendations NSSE findings should be considered in: Strategic planning at the university, college and program levels. Identifying strengths and areas of improvement regarding student engagement at the program level. Identifying short and long term modifications that would enhance student engagement. Rewarding teachers that engage students more fully. Modifying course requirements and/or course delivery to respond to concerns identified in the NSSE results.

35. Questions & Discussion Contact Information: Dr. S. J. Sethi: sjsethi@utpa.edusjsethi@utpa.edu Phone: 956-381-2383 This presentation is online at: http://www.oire.panam.edu/publications/nsse2005.ppt http://www.oire.panam.edu/publications/nsse2005.ppt