National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) Slippery Rock - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) Slippery Rock University

Student Engagement  NSSE collects information from first-year and senior students about their experiences in and outside of the classroom through survey  This survey is used to measure the extent to which students engage in effective practices for overall development

Why use a survey to measure engagement?  Focuses on students’ practices involving learning and personal development  Brings knowledge to the university about what to improve on  Shows comparative results against opposing universities

NSSE Project Overview  More than 1600 bachelor’s-granting colleges/universities have been used for measurements  Approximately 1.5 million first-year/senior students from 531 institutions were invited to participate in NSSE 2019  504 in the US, 19 in Canada, and 8 in other countries  Of this population 281,136 responded to the survey from 510 institutions

Selected Comparison Groups  Group 1: PASSHE  PA State System universities participating in NSSE  Group 2: Public Master’s Large  All other current and prior year larger public NSSE institutions sharing the Carnegie classification (Master’s Colleges and Universities)  Group 3: Mid-east Universities  Universities located in the Mid-East for regional comparison.

Response Rates 45% 40% SRU 35% 30% PASSHE 25% 20% Public Master's 15% Large 10% Mid-East 5% Universities 0% First Year Senior

Description of SRU NSSE Results  Engagement Indicators  High-Impact Practices (HIP)  Multi-Year Report

NSSE Engagement Indicators  Higher-Order Learning Academic  Reflective & Integrative Learning Challenge  Learning Strategies  Quantitative Reasoning Learning with  Collaborative Learning Peers  Discussions with Diverse Others  Student-Faculty Interaction Experiences with Faculty  Effective Teaching Practices  Quality of Interactions Campus Environment  Supportive Environment

Engagement score scale Engagement Indicators are • summary measures based on sets of NSSE questions examining key dimensions of student engagement. Use the following key: • ▲ Your students’ average was significantly higher ( p < .05) with an effect size at least .3 in magnitude. △ Your students’ average was significantly higher ( p < .05) with an effect size less than .3 in magnitude. -- -- No significant difference. ▽ Your students’ average was significantly lower ( p < .05) with an effect size less than .3 in magnitude. ▼ Your students’ average was significantly lower ( p < .05) with an effect size at least .3 in magnitude.

SRU scores vs. comparison groups (First-year) Your first-year students Your first-year students Your first-year students First-Year Students compared with compared with compared with Theme Engagement Indicator PASSHE Public Master's Larg Mid-East Univ -- -- Higher-Order Learning -- -- Reflective & Integrative Learning Academic -- -- Challenge Learning Strategies -- -- -- Quantitative Reasoning Collaborative Learning Learning with ▽ -- -- Peers Discussions with Diverse Others -- -- -- Student-Faculty Interaction Experiences -- -- -- with Faculty Effective Teaching Practices Quality of Interactions Campus Environment Supportive Environment

SRU scores vs. Comparison groups (Seniors) Your seniors Your seniors Your seniors Seniors compared with compared with compared with Theme Engagement Indicator PASSHE Public Master's Larg Mid-East Univ -- -- -- Higher-Order Learning -- -- -- Reflective & Integrative Learning Academic -- -- -- Challenge Learning Strategies -- -- -- Quantitative Reasoning ▲ Collaborative Learning Learning with ▽ ▽ -- Peers Discussions with Diverse Others ▲ Student-Faculty Interaction Experiences -- -- -- with Faculty Effective Teaching Practices ▲ Quality of Interactions Campus -- -- Environment Supportive Environment

High-Impact Practices (HIP)  Participation involving:  Service-Learning  Learning Community  Research with Faculty  Internship or Field Experience (Seniors)  Study Abroad (Seniors)  Culminating Senior Experience (Seniors)

High-Impact Practices (HIP)  First-year SRU 13% 56% PASSHE 10% 48% Public Master's Larg 10% 50% Mid-East Univ 11% 49% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Participated in two or more HIPs Participated in one HIP

High-Impact Practices (HIP)  Seniors SRU 67% 24% PASSHE 60% 26% Public Master's Larg 57% 28% Mid-East Univ 68% 22% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Participated in two or more HIPs Participated in one HIP

Multi-Year Report  Presents year-to-year results of key academic challenge items  These results are used to illustrate patterns of change or stability

Multi-Year Report (First-year) Academic Challenge: First-year students Higher-Order Learning Reflective & Integrative Learning Learning Strategies Quantitative Reasoning 60 60 60 60 40.9 45 45 45 45 40.3 39.7 39.0 39.3 38.8 38.6 37.3 36.0 35.6 35.8 34.9 27.9 27.7 27.4 26.7 30 30 30 30 15 15 15 15 0 0 0 0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Academic Challenge (additional items): First-year students Preparing for Class (hrs/wk) Course Reading (hrs/wk) a Assigned Writing (pages) a Course Challenge b Academic Emphasis c 30 30 200 7 4 5.7 5.5 3.3 5.5 5.5 3.2 3.1 3.1 150 20 20 5 3 14.4 14.2 13.5 100 12.2 10 10 3 2 44.7 42.9 42.9 6.7 6.3 6.5 38.0 6.0 50 0 0 0 1 1 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Multi-Year Report (Seniors) Academic Challenge: Seniors Higher-Order Learning Reflective & Integrative Learning Learning Strategies Quantitative Reasoning 60 60 60 60 42.3 42.4 45 45 45 40.6 40.4 45 40.8 40.4 40.0 39.4 38.8 38.7 37.9 37.7 30.6 30.7 29.9 29.1 30 30 30 30 15 15 15 15 0 0 0 0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Academic Challenge (additional items): Seniors Course Reading (hrs/wk) a Assigned Writing (pages) a Course Challenge b Academic Emphasis c Preparing for Class (hrs/wk) 30 30 200 7 4 5.8 5.7 5.5 5.5 3.2 3.2 3.1 150 3.0 20 20 5 3 15.3 14.1 13.9 13.6 100 72.6 70.6 68.0 66.2 10 10 3 2 6.4 6.5 6.3 5.7 50 0 0 0 1 1 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Areas of improvement  Collaborative Learning and Experiences with Faculty Senior scores could be higher in comparison to the other groups involving engagement indicators  Discussion with Diverse Others is on par with PASSHE, but we underperform Public Masters (seniors) and all Mid-east Universities (first-years and seniors)

Areas of improvement Cont  The Multi-year Academic Challenge results have been stagnant or declining slightly in most areas  Academic Emphasis in particular, has been steadily declining for first-years and seniors since 2013.

Strengths  Participation of High-Impact practices  First-year SRU students had the highest percentage of HIPs versus the other comparison groups  Senior students had the second-highest percentage of participation in more than one HIP

Strengths (Cont)  First-year students had higher scores in academic emphasis versus other comparison groups  Both First-year and Senior students had over a 3% increase in response rates  Both First-year and Senior students rated their “Overall Experience” higher than other PASSHE schools