1 / 10

Working Towards a Situational Student Success Model

NEASC Assessment Workshop. Working Towards a Situational Student Success Model. William J. Gammell, Ph.D. Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs for Institutional Effectiveness Eastern Connecticut State University. Situational Student Success Model*.

aizza
Download Presentation

Working Towards a Situational Student Success Model

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. NEASC Assessment Workshop Working Towards a Situational Student Success Model William J. Gammell, Ph.D. Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs for Institutional Effectiveness Eastern Connecticut State University

  2. Situational Student Success Model* • Historically, models of improving academic success have focused on one dimension. • Relied on: demographics -- Race/Ethnicity, SES, 1st Gen • Past academic data -- HS GPA, SAT, Placement Exams Low to Moderate Potential Moderate to High Potential Low High Student’s Academic Potential Classic “Input” approach

  3. Situational Student Success Model* • Limitations: • Explained variance – • Some poor prospects flourish, others do not • Some well-prepared students do not persistent Exams • Resource Issues – • Support delivered where not necessary Low to Moderate Potential Moderate to High Potential Low High Student’s Academic Potential Classic “Input” approach

  4. Situational Student Success Model* What if…..? High Students’ Commitment/ Social Readiness Level Low Low to Moderate Potential/ High Commitment Moderate to High Potential/ High Commitment Enthusiastic Plugger Self-Reliant Achiever Low to Moderate Potential/ Low Commitment Low to Moderate Potential/ Low Commitment Capable /Needs to Engage Lost Learner Low High Students’ Academic Potential Classic “Input” approach

  5. Situational Student Success Model* • Goal = explore other data tracking routines: • More actionable; provide opportunity for earlier interventions • Behavior-based: re-assign risk level based on student behaviors in the first semester or year of enrollment • Access to Success Leading Indicator Project provided foundation

  6. Situational Student Success Model* • Focused on Four Sources of Behavioral Engagement • Judicial Proceedings • Student Clubs

  7. Enrollment Patterns for First Two Years for Fall 2007, Fall 2008, Fall 2009 FTFT Cohorts at Eastern 2715 FTFT students (100%) Continually Retained Stop Out/Return Not Retained 1868 (68.8%) 17 (<1%) 830 (30.6%) Transferred Drop Out/Not Enrolled 601 (22.1%) 229 (8.4%) • 4-yr institutions 12.5% • CC 9.6%

  8. Enrollment Patterns, Student Engagement Behavior and Characteristics for First Two Years for Fall 2007, Fall 2008, Fall 2009 FTFT Cohorts at Eastern 2715 FTFT students (100%) Continually Retained Stop Out/Return Not Retained 17 (<1%) 1868 (68.8%) 830 (30.6%) Transferred Drop Out/Not Enrolled 601 (22.1%) 229 (8.4%) (%) Pell 20.3 URM 15.6 Any offense 24.2 No Library Training 14.7 Complete Training 51.4 Any Club Year 1 8.5 True Vol Service 27.5 Sem 1 GPA > 2.0 89.2 Sem 2 GPA > 2.0 89.8 (%) Pell 24.6 URM 20.6 Any offense 28.8 No Library Training 26.0 Complete Training 38.4 Any Club Year 1 3.9 True Vol Service 17.5 Sem 1 GPA >2.0 43.4 Sem 2 GPA > 2.0 33.5 • 4-yr institutions 12.5% • CC 9.6%

  9. Enrollment Patterns, Student Characteristics and Engagement Behaviors for 601 First Transfer Students CSU Sister = 97 (3.6%) UConn = 116 (4.3%) Other 4-YR = 126 (4.6%) (%) Pell 10.3 URM 9.7 Any offense 25.8 No Library Training 16.9 Complete Training 44.9 Any Club Year 1 5.2 True Vol Service 16.5 Sem 1 GPA > 2.0 90.7 Sem 2 GPA > 2.0 81.3 (%) Pell 12.1 URM 5.7 Any offense 30.2 No Library Training 14.4 Complete Training 56.6 Any Club Year 1 2.6 True Vol Service 20.7 Sem 1 GPA > 2.0 96.6 Sem 2 GPA > 2.0 99.0 (%) Pell 19.0 URM 7.6 Any offense 28.6 No Library Training 17.8 Complete Training 53.5 Any Club Year 1 7.1 True Vol Service 13.5 Sem 1 GPA > 2.0 88.1 Sem 2 GPA > 2.0 92.0 In State Community College = 212 (7.8%) Out of State Community College = 50 (1.8%) (%) Pell 25.5 URM 22.8 Any offense 25.5 No Library Training 25.1 Complete Training 39.4 Any Club Year 1 7.1 True Vol Service 16.5 Sem 1 GPA > 2.0 49.0 Sem 2 GPA > 2.0 42.8 (%) Pell 16.0 URM 8.9 Any offense 44.0 No Library Training 28.9 Complete Training 28.9 Any Club Year 1 8.0 True Vol Service 12.0 Sem 1 GPA > 2.040.8 Sem 1 GPA > 2.043.3

  10. Situational Student Success Model* • Fall 2011 implemented the Library Orientation key indicator with follow-up for all new students that did not participate, or only took the on-line library assessment. • The search for other indicators continues. • * Adapted from K. Blanchard’s & Paul Hersey’s Situational Leadership Model® and Situational Leadership® II (SLII®) from The Ken Blanchard Companies both are registered trademarks of their respective companies.

More Related