Community College Survey of Student Engagement Benchmarks of Effective Educational Practice Spring 2013 Results IR Report #238A

Transcription

1 2013 Community College Survey of Student Engagement Benchmarks of Effective Educational Practice Spring 2013 Results IR Report #238A Office of Institutional Research August 2013

2 Introduction to CCSSE The Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE) utilizes a set of five benchmarks of effective educational practice in community colleges. These benchmarks allow member institutions, with missions focused on teaching, learning, and student success, to gauge and monitor their performance in areas that are central to their work. A description of the five benchmarks appears below. Benchmarks of Effective Educational Practice Active and Collaborative Learning Students learn more when they are actively involved in their education and have opportunities to think about and apply what they are learning in different settings. Through collaborating with others to solve problems or mastering challenging content, students develop valuable skills that prepare them to deal with the kinds of situations and problems they will encounter in the workplace, the community, and their personal lives. Student Effort Students own behaviors contribute significantly to their learning and the likelihood that they will successfully attain their educational goals. Academic Challenge Challenging intellectual and creative work is central to student learning and collegiate quality. Survey items address the nature and amount of assigned academic work, the complexity of cognitive tasks presented to students, and the standards faculty members use to evaluate student performance. Student-Faculty Interaction In general, the more contact students have with their teachers, the more likely they are to learn effectively and persist toward achievement of their educational goals. Through such interactions, faculty members become role models, mentors, and guides for continuous, lifelong learning. Support for Learners Students perform better and are more satisfied at colleges that are committed to their success and cultivate positive working and social relationships among different groups on campus. During spring semesters in 2007, 2009 and 2013, classes were randomly selected for inclusion in CCSSE. Class participation rates were 70% in 2007; 81% in 2009; and 45% in The most recent CCSSE results could be skewed given the low response rate. An advantage of participating in CCSSE is that Colleges have the opportunity to make comparisons between their performance and that of similar colleges. CCSSE provides summary information for several college groupings that are referenced in the College s Institutional Research reports. The summary information associated with the 2013 Cohort utilizes a three-year cohort (2011 through 2013) of participating colleges. The 2013 CCSSE Cohort includes 718 institutions from 48 states and the District of Columbia, three Canadian provinces, plus Bermuda, Micronesia and the Northern Marianas. Eighty colleges, including CCP, are classified as Extra-Large Colleges since their credit students number 15,000+. A listing of Extra-Large Colleges appears at the end of this report. A third college grouping provided 1. The late distribution of the surveys and the directive from the Faculty Federation not to participate in activities of a voluntary nature until a faculty contract was signed may have accounted for the much lower response rate in spring

3 by CCSSE is 2013 Top Performing Colleges. Top Performing Colleges are those that scored in the top 10 percent of the cohort by benchmark. CCSSE does not provide a list if these Colleges and comparison information for this latter grouping of colleges is limited in scope to just benchmark information. The Institutional Research Office issued a series of four reports in summer 2013 based on the Community College Survey of Student Engagement. These reports are as follows Institutional Research Report #238A Community College Survey of Student Engagement Benchmarks of Effective Educational Practice Spring 2013 This report explores CCP s benchmarks of student engagement as measured by the 2013 CCSSE student responses. CCP engagement is compared throughout the report with the 2013 CCSSE Cohort and the Extra-Large Colleges group. Comparisons of CCP engagement with 2013 Top Performing Colleges is limited to benchmark scores. Institutional Research Report #238B Community College Survey of Student Engagement - A Comparison of Student Responses in Spring 2013, 2009 and 2007 As implied in the title, this report focuses on intra-institutional comparisons of student engagement benchmarks across the three time periods the survey process was undertaken by the College. Institutional Research Report #238C Community College Survey of Student Engagement - Trends in Students Use, Satisfaction and Importance of CCP Support Services In addition to gathering information about student engagement, the CCSSE explores student use, satisfaction and perceived importance of 11 institutional support services. Student responses in 2013 are compared intra-institutionally with their predecessors in 2009 and 2007 and inter-institutionally with the 2013 CCSSE Cohort and the Extra-Large Colleges group. Institutional Research Report #238D Assessment of Mission Effectiveness: Development of General Education and Workforce Skills Results Based on Spring 2013 Community College Survey of Student Engagement The CCSSE survey also explores 15 areas related to the development of general education and workforce skills and affective attributes. Student responses to these items in 2013 are compared intra-institutionally with their predecessors in 2009 and 2007 and inter-institutionally with the 2013 CCSSE Cohort and the Extra-Large Colleges group. 2

4 Benchmark Scores The following table contains average scores for the five benchmarks. Scores were computed by averaging the scores on individual survey items that comprise each benchmark. Benchmark scores are standardized so that the mean for all students is 50 and the standard deviation is 25. Higher benchmark scores indicate greater levels of effectiveness. Score Differences reflect the difference between the comparison group score and CCP s score on the benchmark. Benchmarks that received highest grades at CCP were Academic Challenge and Student Effort. These benchmarks also resulted in the largest differences in scores between CCP and the groups of comparison colleges. Support for Learners was a dimension of student engagement that received the lowest benchmark score at CCP (see Table 1). Across the benchmarks, CCP s scores were higher than the Extra Large Colleges and the 2013 CCSSE Cohort. The College was among the Top-Performing Colleges for Academic Challenge and also scored well in the Student Effort benchmark (see Figure 1). Table Benchmark Summary Table All Students Figure CCP Benchmark with CCSSE Cohort and Top-Performing Colleges 3

5 Active and Collaborative Learning Benchmark Seven items contributed to the Active and Collaborative Learning Benchmark which focused on student collaboration and involvement in academic activities in and out of the class. CCP s performance for this benchmark was above it s institutional peers. Compared with their peers at other participating institutions, CCP students:. Participated in class discussions significantly more often (see Table 2, Item 4a) Prepared class presentations less often (see Table 2, Item 4b) Worked on projects or assignments with other students both in and outside of class more often (see Table 2, Item 4f and 4g) Tutored other students more often (see Table 2, Item 4h) Participated in a community-based project as part of a course more often (see Table 2, Item 4i) Discussed their readings or class work with others outside of class more often (see Table 2, Item 4r). Community College of Philadelphia Benchmark Scores Extra Large Colleges Table 2 Mean Rating of Items in Active and Collaborative Learning Benchmark 2013 CCSSE Cohort All Students ** T-test (2-tailed) significant group difference 4

6 description Student Effort Benchmark Eight items contributed to the Student Effort Benchmark, which focused on class preparation and resource usage. CCP s performance for this benchmark surpassed it s institutional peers. Compared to their peers, CCP students: Prepared multiple drafts of an assignment significantly more often (see Table 3, Item 4c) Came to class significantly better prepared (see Table 3, Item 4e) Read more books for pleasure or personal enrichment (see Table 3, Item 6b) Accessed tutoring services and computer labs more often (see Table 4, Item 13.1d & 13.1h) Accessed skills labs less often (see Table 4, Item 13.1e) In addition, CCP students ability to integrate information from multiple sources and the number of hours they spent preparing for class was in line with the Cohort averages (see Table 3, Item 4d & 10a). Community College of Philadelphia Benchmark Scores Extra Large Colleges 2013 CCSSE Cohort All Students Table 3 Mean Rating of Items 4, 6, and 10 in Student Effort Benchmark ** T-test (2-tailed) significant group difference 5

7 Table 4 Mean Rating of Item 13 in Student Effort Benchmark ** T-test (2-tailed) significant group difference 6

8 Academic Challenge Benchmark Based on responses to the ten survey items that comprise the Academic Challenge Benchmark, CCP students, on average, indicated they were sufficiently challenged across a number of dimensions. CCP had the highest mean score for this benchmark, placing it at the top among it s peers. Compared to students attending peer institutions, CCP students indicated they: Worked significantly harder to meet their instructors expectations (see Table 5, Item 4p) Analyzed, synthesized, and evaluated information significantly more often (see Table 5, Item 5b, 5c, & 5d) Applied new concepts, theories, or performed new skills more often (see Table 5, Item 5e & 5f) Read significantly more assigned readings (see Table 6, Item 6a) Wrote more papers (see Table 6, Item 6c) Students at CCP were also more challenged of by their exams but felt more encouraged to study than their peers (see Table 6, Item 7 & 9a). Community College of Philadelphia Benchmark Scores Extra Large Colleges 2013 CCSSE Cohort All Students Table 5 Mean Rating of Items 4 and 5 in Academic Challenge Benchmark ** T-test (2-tailed) significant group difference 7

9 Table 6 Mean Rating of Items 6, 7, and 9 in Academic Challenge Benchmark ** T-test (2-tailed) significant group difference 8

10 Student-Faculty Interaction Benchmark Six survey items focusing on communication between students and faculty were used to measure the Student-Faculty Interaction Benchmark. CCP s performance for this benchmark surpassed it s institutional peers. The results show that CCP students expressed an intermediate level of engagement with faculty that was higher than their peers at other institutions. Compared to their peers, CCP students indicated they: Contacted their instructors via less often (see Table 7, Item 4k) Discussed their grades or assignments with their instructors significantly more often (see Table 7, Item 4l) Engaged in conversations with faculty about readings or class work outside of class significantly more often (see Table 7, Item 4n) Received prompt feedback from faculty on their academic performance significantly more often (see Table 7, Item 4o) Worked with faculty on extracurricular activities more often (see Table 7, Item 4q) On average, CCP students discussed their career plans with an instructor or advisor at or about the same frequency as students attending other institutions (see Table 7, Item 4m). Community College of Philadelphia Benchmark Scores Extra Large Colleges 2013 CCSSE Cohort All Students Table 7 Mean Rating of Items in Student-Faculty Interaction Benchmark ** T-test (2-tailed) significant group difference 9

11 Support for Learners Benchmark Seven items were included in the Support for Learners Benchmark that contained questions concerning campus climate, academic, and student support services. CCP s performance for this benchmark exceeded the Extra Large and overall Cohort averages; however, within all of the benchmarks, it was the College s lowest performing index. Compared to their peers, CCP students indicated that they received: Less support to achieve success in college (see Table 8, Item 9b) More encouragement to interact with students from diverse backgrounds (see Table 8, Item 9c) About the same amount of support for their out-of-classroom obligations (family, work, etc.) (see Table 8, Item 9d) More social support (see Table 8, Item 9e) Significantly more financial support (see Table 8, Item 9f) In addition, CCP students accessed academic advising and career counseling services more often than their peers at other institutions (see Table 8, Item 13.1a & 13.1b). Community College of Philadelphia Benchmark Scores Extra Large Colleges 2013 CCSSE Cohort All Students Table 8 Mean Rating of Items in Support for Learners Benchmark 10

12 2013 Comparison Group of Extra-Large Colleges (15,000+ Students) Institution City State Year of Participation American River College Sacramento CA 2013 Anne Arundel Community College Arnold MD 2012 Austin Community College Austin TX 2013 Bakersfield College Bakersfield CA 2011 Bergen Community College Paramus NJ 2012 Blinn College Brenham TX 2012 Broward College Ft. Lauderdale FL 2011 Chaffey College Rancho Cucamonga CA 2013 College of DuPage Glen Ellyn IL 2012 College of Lake County Grayslake IL 2012 College of Southern Nevada Las Vegas NV 2011 Columbus State Community College Columbus OH 2013 Community College of Allegheny County Pittsburgh PA 2013 Community College of Philadelphia Philadelphia PA 2013 Daytona State College Daytona Beach FL 2013 De Anza College Cupertino CA 2012 Des Moines Area Community College Ankeny IA 2012 Edison State College Fort Myers FL 2013 El Paso Community College El Paso TX 2013 Florida State College at Jacksonville Jacksonville FL 2013 Foothill College Los Altos Hills CA 2012 Fresno City College Fresno CA 2011 Front Range Community College Westminster CO 2012 Georgia Perimeter College Decatur GA 2011 Glendale Community College Glendale AZ 2011 Glendale Community College Glendale CA 2011 Grand Rapids Community College Grand Rapids MI 2013 Grossmont College El Cajon CA 2012 Harper College Palatine IL 2012 Henry Ford Community College Dearborn MI 2011 Houston Community College Houston TX 2013 Ivy Tech Community College - Central Indiana Indianapolis IN 2011 Jefferson Community and Technical College Louisville KY 2013 Johnson County Community College Overland Park KS 2012 Kingsborough Community College Brooklyn NY 2011 Kirkwood Community College Cedar Rapids IA 2013 LaGuardia Community College Long Island City NY Continued on Next Page - 11

13 Institution City State Year of Participation Lansing Community College Lansing MI 2013 Lone Star College CyFair Cypress TX 2013 Lone Star College - North Harris Houston TX 2013 Macomb Community College Warren MI 2013 Madison Area Technical College Madison WI 2013 Mesa Community College Mesa AZ 2011 Metropolitan Community College Omaha NE 2013 Miami Dade College Miami FL 2012 Milwaukee Area Technical College Milwaukee WI 2012 Modesto Junior College Modesto CA 2013 Monroe Community College Rochester NY 2012 Montgomery College Rockville MD 2012 Moraine Valley Community College Palos Hills IL 2011 Mt. San Antonio College Walnut CA 2011 Northern Virginia Community College Annandale VA 2011 Northwest Vista College San Antonio TX 2013 Oakland Community College Bloomfield Hills MI 2012 Owens Community College Perrysburg OH 2012 Ozarks Technical Community College Springfield MO 2013 Palm Beach State College Lake Worth FL 2011 Palomar College San Marcos CA 2011 Pasadena City College Pasadena CA 2012 Pima Community College Tucson AZ 2011 Portland Community College - Sylvania Portland OR 2011 Richland College Dallas TX 2012 Riverside City College Riverside CA 2013 Sacramento City College Sacramento CA 2012 Salt Lake Community College Salt Lake City UT 2012 San Antonio College San Antonio TX 2013 Santa Fe College Gainesville FL 2013 Santa Monica College Santa Monica CA 2012 Seminole State College of Florida Sanford FL 2013 Sinclair Community College Dayton OH 2012 South Texas College McAllen TX 2013 St. Petersburg College St. Petersburg FL 2013 Tarrant County College District Fort Worth TX 2013 The Community College of Baltimore County Baltimore MD 2012 Tidewater Community College Norfolk VA 2013 Triton College River Grove IL 2013 Tulsa Community College Tulsa OK 2013 Valencia College Orlando FL 2013 Vincennes University Vincennes IN 2013 Wake Technical Community College Raleigh NC