Community College Survey of Student Engagement SPRING 2014 RESULTS

Transcription

1 Community College Survey of Student Engagement SPRING 2014 RESULTS Office of Research and Planning Division of Institutional Advancement January 14, 2015

2 Table of Contents Introduction... 1 Overview of Selected Findings... 1 CCSSE Main Survey Results... 1 Goals (CCSSE question 17a-f, 8, 35)... 1 Support (15., 16., 11., 18., 10.)... 3 Persistence (20., 14.)... 5 Services Usage, Satisfaction, and Importance (CCSSE question a-k.)... 6 Growth (7., 12.)... 9 Overall Satisfaction at CCSF (26., 27.) Benchmarks of Effective Educational Practices in Community Colleges Active and Collaborative Learning Student Effort Academic Challenge Student-Faculty Interaction Support for Learners CCSSE Special Focus Items Promising Practices for Student Success CCSF Additional Custom Questions Understanding of Learning Outcomes Class Convenience and Instructional Quality Community and Leadership Resource and Barriers Health Care Financial Aid Office CCSF Usage (Additional Questions #15 or #20 in Custom Items) Methodology CCSSE Member Colleges Survey Respondents Student Respondent Profile... 32

3 Introduction The Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE) offers a unique measure of institutional effectiveness through the eyes of the individuals receiving the education and student services from the institution. 1 CCSSE is based on a large body of research indicating student engagement is positively correlated with academic success and persistence. 2 Results from the CCSSE survey can provide further insights into the strengths of programs and services at City College of San Francisco (CCSF) as well as opportunities for the institution to enhance students educational experiences and outcomes. A majority of credit students begin their higher education experience in the fall. The CCSSE survey is always conducted in the spring to allow time for students to immerse themselves in the college experience. These survey respondents do not include early leavers, those who exit the college during the fall semester. As a result, these survey results represent the credit student population at CCSF who were persistent for at least one term. CCSF conducted the CCSSE during the spring 2014 semester. For comparison, CCSSE provides aggregated data on institutions that administered the CCSSE between 2012 and CCSF results can be compared with the CCSSE extra-large colleges group due to the unique factors involved with providing an engaging environment for a large student body. CCSF also administered the CCSSE during the spring 2007 semester allowing current responses to be compared with previous results. This report provides a summary of the full CCSSE survey. CCSF results from CCSSE-2014 and CCSSE-2007 survey administration (frequencies and means) and also highlights and reports are available at Overview of Selected Findings CCSSE Main Survey Results Goals (CCSSE question 17a-f, 8, 35) Student goals shape the experience students are expecting from their time at CCSF. Goals are influenced by the type of academic credentials students have already earned. Sixty-one percent of survey respondents reported the highest degree they have earned was a high school diploma or GED. Only three percent of respondents indicated they did not have any academic credentials. There are more Highest Academic Credential Earned % 55% 8% 8% 18% 8% % 61% 7% 9% 14% 5% 25% 5 75% 10 None High school diploma or GED Vocational/technical certificate Associate degree Bachelor's degree Master's/doctoral/ professional degree Figure A. Highest educational attainment of survey respondents CCSF Office of Research and Planning 1 January 2015

4 respondents with only a high school diploma or GED in 2014 than in 2007 and fewer with bachelor s degrees or graduate degrees. Respondents were asked to rate six goals/reasons for attending CCSF. Each of the goals were rated as a primary goal, secondary goal, or not a goal. Sixty-five percent of respondents indicated transfer to a 4-year college or university as their primary goal for attending CCSF. This is greater than in 2007 where 57% of respondents indicated transfer to a 4-year college or university as a primary goal. The larger proportion of respondents indicating transfer as a primary goal mirrors the increase in proportion of respondents who indicated the highest degree they obtained was less than a bachelor s degree. Four year transfer goal was negatively correlated with all other goals except obtaining an associate degree (0.06). The negative correlation indicates respondents who select transfer to a 4-year institution as their primary goal were less likely to select additional primary goals. Forty-seven percent of respondents indicated self-improvement/personal enjoyment as a primary goal for attending CCSF. Self-improvement was correlated with obtaining or update job-related skills (0.38). Updating job related skills was a primary goal for 42% of respondents. Areas in which a large proportion of respondents indicated as not a goal included change careers and complete a certificate program with 50.5% and 45.1% of respondents indicating not a goal respectively. Primary goal Secondary goal Not a goal Transfer to a 4-year institution 65.3% 14.4% 20.4% Self-improvement/ personal enjoyment 47.2% 33.1% 19.7% Obtain or update job-related skills % Obtain an associate degree 33.6% 31.6% 34.8% Complete a certificate program % 45.1% Change careers 26.3% 23.2% 50.5% Table 2. Reasons for Attending CCSF 2014 respondents. The needs or preferences of students at CCSF are reflected by their intention to enroll in various types of courses. ESL, developmental reading, developmental writing, developmental math and honors courses were course areas which contained at least 57% of respondents indicating they have not done nor plan to do. The area respondents appear most interested in was internship, field experience, co-op experience, or clinical assignment with 19% having already completed this experience and another 39% planning to complete. Intention or completion in course areas comparisons between CCSF-2014 respondents and extra-large colleges comparison group results reveal CCSF-2014 results were 10 percentage points higher in ESL courses, five percentage points higher in developmental reading and developmental writing courses respectively, and five percentage points lower in the developmental math courses. CCSF Office of Research and Planning 2 January 2015

5 ESL course Course and Experience Completion 72% 7% 21% Honors course 67% 26% 7% Developmental reading 65% 16% 19% Developmental writing 6 18% 22% Developmental math course 57% 18% 25% Internship, field experience 42% 39% 19% Figure B. Planned or completed coursework and experience I have not done nor plan to do I plan to do I have done Intention or completion in course areas comparisons between CCSF-2014 results and CCSF-2007 results reveal developmental course areas and honors course increased by three to six percentage points between 2007 and Internship, field experience, co-op experience, or clinical assignment increased by eight percentage points. Support (15., 16., 11., 18., 10.) Student perception of family and friend support and positive supportive relationships among constituents at CCSF has been demonstrated, through research 3, to improve student engagement and positively influence student achievement and persistence. Seventy-six percent of respondents indicated friends were quite a bit or extremely supportive of them attending CCSF and 8 indicated immediate family were quite a bit or extremely supportive. Sixty-nine percent of respondents felt high levels of support from both family and friends. These support levels were similar to the support felt by CCSF respondents of the 2007 CCSSE. Level of Support for Attending CCSF Family 5% 16% 24% 55% Friends 5% 29% 46% Figure C. Perception of friends and immediate family support. Quality of relationships among constituents at CCSF was measured on a scale of one to seven. One and two were considered unhelpful or unfriendly while six and seven were considered helpful and supportive. Relationships with instructors, other students, and administrative personnel and offices have all improved since Seventy percent and 55% of respondents indicated instructors and other students were helpful and supportive respectively. Positive perception increased 13 percentage points in the student group and 12 percentage points in the instructor group since The 2014 results were Not Very Somewhat Quite a Bit Extremely CCSF Office of Research and Planning 3 January 2015

6 also higher than extra-large colleges comparison group respondents where 6 and 51% of respondents indicated instructors and other students were helpful and friendly respectively. Administrative personnel and offices improved from 31% in 2007 to 38% in This value is in line with the extralarge colleges comparison group which also contained 38% of respondents indicating administrative personnel and offices as helpful. Helpful Relationships with Groups at CCSF Other students Instructors Administrative personnel and offices % 42% 31% % 38% Figure D. Proportions of respondents rating groups as helpful (6-7) between 2007 and 2014 administration of the CCSSE. Group Year Helpful Neutral Unhelpful Instructors % 2% % 2% Other Students % 54% 4% % 43% 2% Administrative personnel and offices % 59% % 54% 8% Table 3. Proportion of respondents rating groups at CCSF as helpful (6-7), neutral (3-5), and unhelpful (1-2) between 2007 and 2014 survey year. Financial and time resources students expend to attend college indicate the type of needs they may have with regard to student services. Respondents were asked about six different sources of funding to pay their tuition at CCSF. Each source was classified as a major source, minor source, or not a source. Fifty-three percent of respondents indicated their own income/savings as a major source to pay for their tuition at CCSF. Own income/savings is negatively correlated with all other sources except for Major source Minor source Not a source My own income/savings 53.1% 26.6% 20.3% Grants and Scholarships % 59.6% Parent or spouse/significant other's income/savings 24.6% 22.4% 53. Public Assistance % 82.5% Student loans (bank, etc.) 6.9% 6.8% 86.4% Employer Contribution 4.8% 8.4% 86.8% Table 4. Funding sources to pay for Tuition at CCSF employer contribution (0.08). Thirty percent of respondents indicated grants and scholarships as a major tuition source. Areas where most respondents indicated as not a source of tuition funding include CCSF Office of Research and Planning 4 January 2015

7 employer contribution and student loans (bank, etc.) with 87% and 86% of respondents indicated as not a source respectively. Respondents were asked about the amount of hours spent in a typical 7-day week performing various activities. Two activities many respondents spent six hours or more per week performing include preparing for class and working for pay with 63% and 67% of respondents respectively. When these two activities are disaggregated by enrollment status, more full-time respondents report spending more than 10 hours preparing for class, 47% compared to 24%, and more part-time respondents report spending more than 10 hours working for pay, 65% compared to 44%. A larger proportion of full-time students also spent more time commuting to and from classes than part-time students with 14% compared to 8% spending more than 10 hours a week commuting to and from classes. Low participation activities include college-sponsored activities and caring for live in dependents with 93% and 75% spending less than six hours per week on these activities. Providing care for dependents and participating in college-sponsored activities were not noticeably different between the two groups. < 6 hours 6-10 hours hours 21 + hours Preparing for class 37% 32% 21% 1 Full-time 23% 3 28% 19% Part-time 43% 33% 18% 6% Working for pay 33% 9% 15% 44% Full-time 45% 11% 21% 23% Part-time 27% 8% 12% 53% Commuting to and from class 68% 22% 6% 4% Full-time 58% 28% 1 4% Part-time 72% 4% 4% Participating in college-sponsored activities 92% 5% 2% 1% Full-time 89% 5% 4% 2% Part-time 93% 5% 1% 1% Providing care for dependents living with you 74% 9% 6% 11% Full-time 73% 11% 6% 11% Part-time 75% 8% 6% 11% Table 5. Hours spent on a typical week in various activities. Persistence (20., 14.) Respondent intention on returning to CCSF and issues which may influence their likelihood for withdrawal can allow CCSF to determine if more students are succeeding in their goals and whether there are student services which may encourage more students to continue towards their goals. When asked about plans to take classes again at their current college, over 6 of all respondents indicated they planned to return within the next 12 months among CCSF-2014, CCSF-2007, and extra-large colleges comparison group. CCSF-2014 respondents indicating they will accomplish their goals during current term and not return was 15% which is six percentage points higher than the CCSF-2007 group and two percentage points higher than the extra-large colleges comparison group. CCSF-2014 respondents indicating uncertain in their plans to take classes again was 22% which is four percentage points higher than CCSF-2007 group and seven percentage points higher than the extra-large colleges comparison group. More CCSF-2014 respondents are not returning, because they reached their goals, and more respondents are uncertain about their future attendance at CCSF than in CCSF Office of Research and Planning 5 January 2015

8 Plans for Future Attendance Goal completed this term/not returning I have no current plans to return Within the next 12 months Uncertain CCSF % 4% 6 22% CCSF % 3% 69% 18% X-large Colleges 13% 4% 67% 15% Figure E. Proportions of respondents responding to question of plans for returning to this college. Respondents indicated the likelihood in which a variety of issues may cause withdrawal with choices including very likely, likely, somewhat likely and not likely. Probable is defined to include all respondents who did not respond not likely. The reason most respondents indicated as a probable cause for class or institutional withdrawal was Transfer to a 4-year college. Seven percentage points more respondents indicated this reason as a probable cause than in Work full-time and Lack of finances were two other issues many respondents indicated as reasons that could cause them to withdraw. Lack of finances issue increased ten percentage points between 2007 and Situations Which May Cause Withdrawal from Class or Institution CCSF-2007 CCSF-2014 X-large Colleges % 71% 72% 68% 69% 68% 63% 58% 71% 55% 49% 51% 46% 5 46% e. Transfer to a 4-year college a. Work full-time d. Lack of finances b. Caring for dependents c. Academically unprepared Figure F. Proportions of respondents responding somewhat likely, likely, or very likely to withdrawal situations. Services Usage, Satisfaction, and Importance (CCSSE question a-k.) Services offered at CCSF were rated on use, importance, and satisfaction on a scale of one (low) to three (high). Respondents were also able to select zero (N.A.) for use and satisfaction ratings. Higher usage and importance indicate strong student demand. Satisfaction ratings for high use and high importance services are key areas for further analysis. Services with the highest proportion of respondents indicating usage as sometimes (2) or often (3) include computer lab, academic advising, and skills labs (writing, math, etc.). Services with the lowest proportion of usage include job placement assistance, services to students with disabilities, and child care. CCSF Office of Research and Planning 6 January 2015

9 10 Usage of Services at CCSF Sometimes or often Don't know/n.a % 55% 13% 1 47% 42% 42% 38% 36% 25% 17% 23% 18% 34% 35% 24% 15% 11% 5 5% 55% H. Computer lab A. Academic Advising E. Skill labs (writing, math, etc.) D. Peer or other tutoring G. Financial aid advising J. Transfer credit assistance B. Career Counseling I. Student organizations Figure G. Proportion of respondents indicating usage as Sometimes or Often and Don t know/n.a. C. Job placement assistance K. Services to F. Child care students with disabilities Analysis of importance and satisfaction among services focused upon proportion of respondents who indicated the service was very important (3) and proportion of respondents not at all satisfied (1) with the service. Respondents who indicated N.A. in satisfaction responses were excluded from the satisfaction proportion computation. In figure H., a regression line was generated from the plotted data to determine expected proportion of respondents indicating not at all satisfied in relation to the proportion of respondents rating the service as very important. According to the linear regression, fewer respondents indicating a service is very important increases the expected proportion of respondents not at all satisfied with the service. It should also be noted the more respondents indicating a service is very important is positively related to the proportion of respondents indicating usage as sometimes or often. Services with moderate to high usage (36% or greater respondents indicating sometimes or often ) and with high importance (5 or greater respondents indicating very important ) included computer lab, academic advising, skills lab, peer or other tutoring, financial aid advising, transfer credit assistance, and career counseling. The proportion of respondents indicating not at all satisfied for these student services ranged between seven percent and 17%. Computer lab, academic advising, skill labs, and peer tutoring all contained fewer number of respondents indicating Not at all satisfied, between seven percent and 11%. Financial aid advising, transfer credit assistance, and career counseling contained a higher number of respondents indicating Not at all satisfied, between 15% and 17%. CCSF Office of Research and Planning 7 January 2015

10 Figure H. Proportion of respondents indicating service is very important (3) and proportions rating not at all satisfied (1) with the service. (Blue linear regression line included to determine services with high levels of dissatisfaction in relation to level of importance.) Services Very Important Not at all Satisfied A. Academic Advising 67% 11% B. Career Counseling 58% 15% C. Job placement assistance 39% 27% D. Peer or other tutoring 5 1 E. Skill labs (writing, math, etc.) 53% 9% F. Child care 3 37% G. Financial aid advising 59% 15% H. Computer lab 61% 7% I. Student organizations 34% 17% J. Transfer credit assistance 63% 17% K. Services to students with disabilities 48% 26% CCSF Office of Research and Planning 8 January 2015

11 Growth (7., 12.) A primary role of higher education is to promote growth in individuals and prepare them for life beyond college. 4 Challenging students to do their best work and respondents self- report of personal development are measures of this mental preparation. Respondents rated the extent exams have challenged them to do their best work on a scale of one (low) to seven (high). More CCSF-2014 respondents indicated exams challenged them to do their best than in 2007 and more CCSF respondents felt challenged by their exams than extra-large colleges comparison group respondents. Challenged to do Best Work on Exams not challenged (1-3) moderate(4-5) challenging (6-7) CCSF % 58% 34% CCSF % 54% 33% X-large Colleges 9% 6 31% Figure I. Extent current academic year exams have challenged you to do your best work at CCSF When asked about influence of the experience at this college in contributing to various areas of personal growth, 5 or more respondents indicated quite a bit or very much to all areas except community engagement. Areas with highest proportion include Acquiring a broad general education, Thinking critically and analytically, and Learning effectively on your own. Average increase in development areas, when compared to CCSF-2007 survey respondents, was 13 percentage points. Areas with the largest improvements include Solving numerical problems, 21 percentage points higher, and Effective collaboration, 15 percentage points higher. When compared to extra-large colleges comparison group, all proportions were near or slightly higher for CCSF-2014 respondents. Differences were most pronounced (seven percentage points or higher for CCSF-2014) in development areas such as Acquiring job or work-related knowledge and skills, Contributing to the welfare of your community, and Developing a personal code of values and ethics CCSF Office of Research and Planning 9 January 2015

12 Figure J. Proportion of respondents indicating Quite a bit or Very much to contribution made by experiences at this college on various personal development areas # Label Development Area a. General education Acquiring a broad general education b. Job skills Acquiring job or work-related knowledge and skills c. Effective writing Writing clearly and effectively d. Effective speaking Speaking clearly and effectively e. Critical thinking Thinking critically and analytically f. Solving numerical problems Solving numerical problems g. Using computer technology Using computing and information technology h. Effective Collaboration Working effectively with others i. Self-learning Learning effectively on your own j. Self-awareness Understanding yourself k. Understanding others Understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds l. Ethical awareness Developing a personal code of values and ethics m. Community engagement Contributing to the welfare of your community n. Career goals Developing clearer career goals o. Career opportunities Gaining information about career opportunities * Bar graph sorted from high to low for CCSF-2014 responses. CCSF Office of Research and Planning 10 January 2015

13 Overall Satisfaction at CCSF (26., 27.) Satisfaction of the overall experience at CCSF was measured by whether respondents would recommend CCSF to friends or family members and respondents rating of their entire educational experience as either excellent, good, fair, or poor. Ninety-four percent of CCSF-2014 respondents responded yes when asked if they would recommend CCSF to friends or family. This was one percentage point lower than in CCSF-2007 survey respondents and the same as the extra-large colleges comparison group. (Figure not shown) Forty percent of CCSF-2014 respondents indicated their entire educational experience at CCSF was excellent compared to 31% in CCSF-2007 respondents and 29% in 2014 extra-large colleges comparison group for their respective colleges. CCSF-2014 respondents were 11 percentage points higher than the extra-large colleges comparison group and nine percentage points higher than CCSF Evaluation of Entire Educational Experience at this College Poor Fair Good Excellent CCSF % 15% 44% CCSF % 16% 51% 31% X-large Colleges 2% 15% 55% 29% Figure K. Evaluation of entire education experience at this college. CCSF Office of Research and Planning 11 January 2015

14 Benchmarks of Effective Educational Practices in Community Colleges Research indicates college students are more likely to achieve student learning and reach their academic goals if they are actively engaged with other students, college faculty and staff, and with their area of study 4. CCSSE designers grouped conceptually related survey questions together, based on student engagement research, into five key benchmark areas - active and collaborative learning, student effort, academic challenge, student-faculty interaction, and support for learners. Validation research on the CCSSE national benchmarks concluded the five benchmark areas are positively correlated to academic success and persistence outcomes. Academic Success Persistence GPA 1st to 2nd term persistence Course completion 1st to 2nd year persistence Grades in developmental courses Number of terms enrolled Degree and certificate completion Total credit hours completed Attainment of Transfer-ready status Table 6. Examples of Academic Success and Persistence measures National benchmarks scores are computed and standardized with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 25 for the overall cohort group to allow a common measure as a starting point for viewing institutional results. CCSF benchmark results in 2014 are higher than they were in 2007 indicating improvements in student perception. Improvements in standardized benchmark scores ranged between 2.4 and 5.5. Extra-large colleges comparison group s standardized benchmark scores were very similar between 2007 and 2014 groups (difference < 0.5). All 2007 CCSF scores were lower than the extra-large colleges group while all 2014 CCSF scores are above the extra-large colleges group. Benchmark scores for institutions scoring in the top 10 percentile of the 2014 cohort group are also displayed to provide an aspirational goal. Difference between CCSF extra - large Colleges 2014-Top performing Colleges Focus Areas CCSF-2007 CCSF-2014 Active and Collaborative Learning Student Effort Academic Challenge Student-Faculty Interaction Support for Learners Table 7. Standardized benchmark scores among different comparison groups. CCSF-2014 benchmark scores are disaggregated by enrollment status, gender, ethnicity, and age group to make comparisons between student demographic groups at CCSF. CCSF full-time students rated/scored higher in all benchmark areas than part-time students. Students who self-identified ethnically as Black/African Americans rated/scored higher in all benchmark areas than students of other ethnicities. Female students rated higher in student effort and support for learners benchmarks. Students who were 40 years old or greater rated all benchmark areas somewhat lower than students in the other two age categories CCSF Office of Research and Planning 12 January 2015

15 Enrollment Status N Active and Collaborative Learning Student Effort Academic Challenge Student- Faculty Interaction Support for Learners Mean over 5 areas SE over 5 areas ENROLLMENT Full-time Part-time Difference n/a n/a GENDER Male Female Differences n/a n/a ETHNICITY Black/ African American Hispanic Asian/ Pacific Islander White Largest Difference n/a n/a AGE Largest Difference n/a n/a Table 8. Standardized benchmark scores disaggregated by enrollment status, gender, ethnicity, and age group. * orange filled cells indicate highest score in grouping and green filled cells indicate lowest score in grouping. Higher mean engagement scores among full-time students, when compared to part-time students, indicate more time spent at CCSF increases student engagement benchmarks. Differences in age and ethnic benchmark scores are highly related to the group s level of engagement based on enrollment status. Almost half of white respondents enrolled at CCSF part-time and over two thirds of respondents 40 years old or greater attended CCSF part-time while less than 25% of Black/African-American respondents and respondents between the ages of 18 and 24 attended CCSF part-time. CCSF Office of Research and Planning 13 January 2015

16 Active and Collaborative Learning CCSF2007: 46.9; CCSF2014: 52.4; X-large Colleges: 49.5; 2014 Top performing Colleges: 60.3 Students learning capacity increases when they are actively involved in their courses and are able to take what they learn in the classroom and apply it to real world settings. The active and collaborative benchmark measures class participation, student interaction, and application of learning. Research has shown evidence that this measure is highly correlated with both academic success and persistence measures. 5 Current active and collaborative learning benchmark scores are 5.5 points higher than CCSF-2007 and 2.9 points higher than the extra-large colleges comparison group. The current score is 7.9 points lower compared to top performing colleges. Students appear more involved in active learning in 2014 than in Areas where a larger proportion of respondents indicated often or very often in activities between 2007 and 2014 include Worked with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments (11 percentage points higher), participating in class discussions (nine percentage points higher), and class group work (nine percentage points higher). Most proportions for components in the active and collaborative learning benchmark were equal to or better than the extra-large colleges comparison group. Areas where CCSF-2014 was slightly lower were Made a class presentation and Asked questions in class or contributed to class discussions, lower by 6.7 percentage points and four percentage points respectively CCSF Office of Research and Planning 14 January 2015

17 10 Frequency of Activity in Current School Year CCSF-2007 CCSF-2014 X-large Colleges % 63% 45% 54% 49% 47% 48% 49% 25% 34% 27% 26% 15% 24% 12% 8% 8% 1 6% 7% Figure L. Proportion of students who indicated often or very often when asked about current school year experiences in various activities. # Label Activity 4a. Class discussion Asked questions in class or contributed to class discussions 4b. Class presentation Made a class presentation 4f. Class group work Worked with other students on projects during class 4g. Extracurricular collaboration Worked with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments 4h. Tutored others Tutored or taught other students (paid or voluntary) 4i. Community-based projects Participated in a community-based project as a part of a regular course 4r. 4a. Class discussion 4f. Class group work 4r. Communicated ideas from courses to community Communicated ideas from courses to community * Bar graph sorted from high to low for CCSF-2014 responses. 4b. Class presentation 4g. Extracurricular collaboration Discussed ideas from your readings or classes with others outside of class (students, family members, co-workers, etc.) 4h. Tutored others 4i. Community-based projects CCSF Office of Research and Planning 15 January 2015

18 Student Effort CCSF2007: 48.9; CCSF2014: 51.3; X-large Colleges: 49.3; 2014 Top performing Colleges: 58.6 The student effort benchmark measures time students spend preparing for class and preparing course work for submission. Student effort has been shown to be moderately correlated to retention and academic success measures. 5 Current student effort benchmark scores are 2.4 points higher than CCSF and 2 points higher than the extra-large colleges comparison group. The current score is 7.3 points lower when compared to top performing colleges. CCSF respondents report more effort in 2014 than in Proportion of respondents who spent more than six hours per week preparing for class increased from 56% in 2007 to 63% in Respondents who indicated usage as sometimes or often in student support services increased in tutoring (12 percentage points higher), computer labs (13 percentage points higher), and skill labs ( nine percentage points higher), between 2007 and More respondents indicated integrating information from multiple sources and writing multiple drafts of assignments. Most proportions for components in the student effort benchmark were equal to or better than the extra-large colleges comparison group. Only integrating ideas from multiple sources was lower by three percentage points CCSF Office of Research and Planning 16 January 2015

19 # Label Activity 4c. Two or more drafts of assignments Prepared two or more drafts of a paper or assignment before turning it in 4d. Integrate ideas from multiple sources Worked on a paper or project that required integrating ideas or information from various sources 4e. Unprepared for Class Came to class without completing readings or assignments Figure M-1. Proportion of students who indicated often or very often when asked about current school year experiences in various activities. Figure M-2. Proportion of students indicating hours spent preparing for class. Figure M-3. Proportion of students indicating Sometimes or Often usage of following services CCSF Office of Research and Planning 17 January 2015

20 Academic Challenge C0CSF2007: 48.3; CCSF2014: 52.6; X-large Colleges: 50.0; 2014 Top performing Colleges: 57.4 The academic challenge benchmark measures student coursework emphasis in evaluation and application of information and perceived time and mental exertion on learning in courses. Academic challenge was highly correlated with academic success outcomes but weakly correlated with persistence outcomes. 5 Current academic challenge benchmark scores are 4.3 points higher than CCSF-2007 and 2.6 points higher than the extra-large colleges comparison group. The score is 4.8 points below the top performing colleges. Larger proportion of respondents reported quite a bit and very much in coursework emphasizing analysis and application of information in 2014 than in Average change in coursework emphasis was 10.6 percentage points higher in 2014 than in Six percentage points increases were noted for proportions indicating often or very often in Working harder than you thought you could to meet an instructor s standards or expectations and for proportions indicating quite a bit or very much in Encouraging you to spend significant amounts of time studying respectively. CCSF-2014 was similar or slightly higher than extra-large colleges comparison group proportions for all measures. Only Working harder than you thought you could to meet an instructor s standards or expectations was 2 percentage points lower CCSF Office of Research and Planning 18 January 2015

21 10 Frequency of Activity in Current School Year CCSF-2007 CCSF-2014 X-large Colleges 10 Areas of College Emphasis CCSF-2007 CCSF-2014 X-large Colleges % 75% 75% 6 45% 51% 53% 6 4a. Worked harder than you thought you could to meet an instructor's standards or expectations 9a. Encouraging you to spend significant amounts of time studying Figure N-1. Proportion of students who indicated often or very often. Figure N-2. Proportion of students indicating very much or quite a bit 10 Course Work Emphasis of Mental Activities CCSF-2007 CCSF-2014 X-large Colleges % 79% 71% 57% 68% 68% 64% 61% 64% 66% 6 52% % 5b. Analyzing idea elements 5f. Incorporating information in performance 5c. Organize ideas in new ways 5e. Application of theories to new situations 5d. Sound judgment of information Figure N-3. Proportion of students who indicated very much or quite a bit emphasis in mental activities * Bar graph sorted from high to low for CCSF-2014 responses. CCSF Office of Research and Planning 19 January 2015

22 Student-Faculty Interaction CCSF2007: 43.6; CCSF2014: 49.0; X-large Colleges: 48.2; 2014 Top performing Colleges: 59.1 The student-faculty interaction benchmark measures student perception of interaction with faculty on course related and extracurricular topics. Research has shown the student-faculty interaction benchmark is moderately positively correlated with persistence and academic success. 5 This measure is similar to the active and collaborative learning in that it measures student interaction with others. Current student-faculty interaction benchmark scores are 5.4 points higher than CCSF-2007 and 0.8 points higher than the extra-large colleges comparison group. The score is 9.9 points lower when compared to top performing colleges. All components of this benchmark have improved since The proportion of respondents indicating often or very often increased more than 10 percentage points on most student-faculty interactions measured. Many measures were comparable or moderately higher than the extra-large colleges comparison group. Grades and assignment discussions with instructors were nine percentage points lower but received prompt feedback on performance was five percentage points higher when comparing CCSF-2014 results with the extra-large colleges comparison group CCSF Office of Research and Planning 20 January 2015

23 Frequency of Activity in Current School Year 10 CCSF-2007 CCSF-2014 X-large Colleges % 63% 58% 6 63% 49% 35% 29% 28% 26% 16% 12% 21% 17% 7% 13% 1 4o. Received prompt feedback (written or oral) from instructors on your performance 4k. Used to communicate with an instructor 4l. Discussed grades or assignments with an instructor 4m. Talked about career plans with an instructor or advisor 4n. Discussed ideas from your readings or classes with instructors outside of class 4q. Worked with instructors on activities other than coursework Figure O. Proportion of students who indicated often or very often when asked about current school year experiences in various student-faculty interactions. * Bar graph sorted from high to low for CCSF-2014 responses. CCSF Office of Research and Planning 21 January 2015

24 Support for Learners CCSF2007: 47.0; CCSF2014: 52.5; X-large Colleges: 48.6; 2014 Top performing Colleges: 60.2 The support for learners benchmark measures student perception of college emphasis in supporting students through multiple aspects of the college experience and their perceived usage of academic advising and career counseling services. Research has shown the support for learners benchmark is correlated with persistence but has little correlation with academic success. 5 It has been hypothesized that students who score higher in the support for learner benchmark are academically underprepared. The supportive environment and support services at an institution can help raise performance of these underprepared students to college level proficiency and improve persistence but not produce noticeable differences in academic success between institutions with varying scores on this benchmark. 6 Current support for learners benchmark scores are 5.5 points higher than CCSF-2007 and 3.9 points higher than the extra-large colleges comparison group. The current score is 7.7 points lower when compared to top performing colleges. All components of this benchmark have improved since More respondents indicated CCSF emphasizes providing the financial support you need to afford your education (18 percentage point increase), providing the support you need to thrive socially (12 percentage point increase), and helping you cope with your non-academic responsibilities (work, family, etc.) (12 percentage point increase). Survey respondents who indicated they sometimes or often use academic advising/planning has also increased by 13 percentage points. Proportions for each component in the support for learner benchmark was greater than or equal to the extra-large colleges comparison group CCSF Office of Research and Planning 22 January 2015

25 10 CCSF Areas of Emphasis CCSF-2007 CCSF-2014 X-large Colleges % 72% 72% 55% 65% 54% 51% 5 33% 26% 38% 35% 21% 33% 27% 9b. Academic support provided 9c. Encouraging student interaction 9f. Financial support 9e. Social support 9d. Non-academic support provided Figure P-1. Proportion of students indicating very much or quite a bit when asked about how much CCSF emphasizes the following areas. # Label CCSF Emphasis 9b. Academic support provided Providing the support you need to help you succeed at this college 9c. Encouraging student interaction Encouraging contact among students from different economic, social, and racial or ethnic backgrounds 9d. Non-academic support provided Helping you cope with your non-academic responsibilities (work, family, etc.) 9e. Social support Providing the support you need to thrive socially 9f. Financial support Providing the financial support you need to afford your education % Usage of Student Services CCSF-2007 CCSF-2014 X-large Colleges 55% 57% 29% 36% a. Academic advising/planning 13.1b. Career counseling Figure P-2. Proportion of students indicating Sometimes or Often usage of following services CCSF Office of Research and Planning 23 January 2015

26 CCSSE Special Focus Items Promising Practices for Student Success (Custom Items #1 through #5) Each year CCSSE includes special focus items unique to the specific administration period. These special focus questions aim at research areas in which there are promising results for student success and more research data is being collected. The 2014 CCSSE special focus items explored timely course registration, new student orientation, new student experience, enrollment in student success courses, and enrollment in organized learning communities. Preliminary research in these special focus items have indicated correlation with student academic success and persistence. Timely registration has been positively correlated with student success. Previous research has correlated late registration with lower grades and lower reenrollment in the next academic term. 7 Eighty-eight percent of respondents completed registration of all or most courses before the first class session. This percentage is noticeably lower than other institutions in the comparison group where 95% completed registration early for all or most courses. CCSF has three times as many respondents reporting none of their courses were registered before the first class session during spring of 2014 than the extra-large colleges comparison group Completed registration before the first class session(s) during the current term 86.5% 68.4% 19.7% CCSF X-large Colleges % 3.4% 6.2% 2.1% All Courses Most Courses Some Courses None Special Focus Question 1. During the current term at this college, I completed registration before the first class session(s). Research has indicated students who attend orientation are more persistent than their non-attending counterparts and orientation is a factor in successful remediation for at risk students. 7 Fifty-eight percent of students were able to attend on-campus or online orientation before beginning classes % 37.6% 25.8% 16.4% Attended on-campus Attended online orientation orientation before beginning before beginning classes classes Orientation experience when I first came to this college CCSF X-large Colleges % Unaware of a college orientation 15.2% 16.8% Unable to attend due to scheduling or other issues 6.4% 7.2% Enrolled in orientation course during 1st term at this college Special Focus Question 2. The ONE response that best describes my experience with orientation when I first came to this college. 7 - For more information visit CCSF Office of Research and Planning 24 January 2015

27 during their first term at CCSF. This is slightly higher than extra-large colleges comparison group where 54% attended orientation before beginning classes. The ratio between online and on-campus orientation respondents indicates a higher reliance on online orientation at CCSF compared to other extra-large community colleges. Learning communities build academic and social cohesion at the institution and increase engagement among students and faculty. This interaction leads to better student outcomes such as increased satisfaction with the institution and increased use of student support services. 7 Student success courses teach student skills, such as time management or awareness of student services, which leads to improved student outcomes. 7 Students enrolled in student success courses have an increased likelihood of obtaining degrees and transfer to four-year institutions. 7 Over half of CCSF students indicated they did not participate in any structured experience for new students, organized learning communities, or student success courses. Extra-large colleges comparison group contained a higher proportion of respondents who did not participate in structured experience for new students and enrolling in an organized learning community. CCSF and extra-large community colleges proportion of students who did not enroll in a student success course was not noticeably different. During First Term at CCSF Participated in structured experience for new students Enrolled in an organized "learning community" Enrolled in a student success course X-large X-large X-large CCSF Colleges CCSF Colleges CCSF Colleges Yes, in my first term 19.5% 19.4% 8.9% 6.8% 13.3% 17.3% Yes, in my first AND one other term 2.7% 2.9% % 3.1% 3.2% Yes, NOT in my first term 6.2% 4.1% 5.1% % 5.8% No 71.6% 73.5% 81.9% 86.9% 73.8% 73.7% 5 Proportion of respondents who participated in noted activity CCSF X-large Colleges % 26.5% 26.2% 26.3% % 13.1% Participated in structured experience for new students Enrolled in an organized "learning community" Enrolled in a student success course Special Focus Questions 3, 4, and 5. Participation in selected activities. 7 - For more information visit CCSF Office of Research and Planning 25 January 2015

28 CCSF Additional Custom Questions Fifteen custom questions were developed in consultation with CCSF s student development division to specifically address topics of interest to the student services departments. Some results can be compared with similar questions from the Credit Student Opinion Survey administered fall 2010 (CSOS-2010). Understanding of Learning Outcomes (Additional Questions #1 and #2 or #6 and #7 in Custom Items) Eighty-four percent of respondents strongly agreed or agreed to the clarity of what they are expected to learn upon completion of their degree, certificate or program. When N/A responses are removed 92% of students strongly agreed or agreed with this statement. Less than 2% of students strongly disagree with this statement. Clear Program Learning Outcomes 41% 43% 6% 2% 9% Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree N/A CCSF Question 2. Upon completion of my degree, certificate, or program, it is clear what I m expected to learn. Forty-nine percent of respondents indicated all of their current courses communicated with them about the expected student learning outcomes (SLO) of the course and another 25% indicated most of their courses articulated expected SLO. Fourteen percent of students indicated none of their current courses discussed expected SLO. Signficant differences were uncovered between communication of student learning outcomes and enrollment type reported by respondents through a weighted correlation (chisq = 2.12, p-value < 0.001). Thirty percent of part-time respondents report fewer than half or none of their courses articulated expected SLO while only 18% of full-time respondents indicated the same. Number of Courses where SLO was Articulated All Most Less than half None Overall 49% 25% 13% 14% Full- Time 53% 29% 11% 7% Part-Time 47% 23% 13% 17% CCSF Question 1. Current classes reviewed or discussed the expected student learning outcome. CCSF Office of Research and Planning 26 January 2015

29 Class Convenience and Instructional Quality (Additional Questions #3 and #4 or #8 and #9 in Custom Items) Ninety three percent of CCSF-2014 respondents rated class schedule times as excellent, good, or fair compared with 83% of CSOS-2010 respondents. A larger proportion of respondents rated courses as good or excellent in CCSF-2014 compared with CSOS Eighty-five percent of students indicated the quality of instruction as excellent or good, while only two percent rated instructional quality as poor among CCSF-2014 respondents. A large majority of survey responses rated course section times as convenient and quality of instruction received as excellent or good. Convenience of class scheduling for students have improved since 2010 while quality of instruction has remained stable. Convenience of class scheduling (times available)? CCSF % 46% 25% 6% 1% CSOS % 37% 32% 14% Excellent Good Fair Poor No opinion CCSF Question 3. How would you rate the convenience of class scheduling? Quality of Instruction in CCSF classes CCSF % 13% 2% CSOS % 12% 3% Excellent Good Fair Poor CCSF Question 4. How would you rate the quality of instruction in your CCSF class? Community and Leadership (Additional Questions #5, #6, and #7 or #10, #11 and #12 in Custom Items) Forty-six percent of respondents indicated CCSF website and indicated announcements are the preferred source of information on getting involved on campus. Information attainment preferences for campus involvement % 16% 13% 6% College website announcements Flyers posted on campus Club fair Social Media CCSF Question 5. What do you feel is the best way to obtain information about getting involved on campus? CCSF Office of Research and Planning 27 January 2015