1 / 33

MPI

MPI. Mission Perception Inventory. Institutional Characteristics and Student Perception of Mission: What Makes a Difference?. Ellen Boylan, Ph.D. ● Marywood University NEAIR 36 th Annual Conference ● Baltimore, Maryland ● Nov. 7 – 10 , 2009. What’s in a mission?. Purpose

gerda
Download Presentation

MPI

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. MPI Mission Perception Inventory Institutional Characteristics and Student Perception of Mission: What Makes a Difference? Ellen Boylan, Ph.D. ● Marywood University NEAIR 36th Annual Conference ● Baltimore, Maryland ● Nov. 7 – 10 , 2009

  2. What’s in a mission?

  3. Purpose Develop an instrument to measure student perception of institutional mission. Test instrument reliability. Uncover constructs (factors). Observe constructs longitudinally. GRANTS IN HIGHER EDUCATION FOR IMPROVED ASSESSMENT METHODS scope of research

  4. Purpose Develop an instrument Test instrument reliability. Uncover constructs. Observe constructs longitudinally. Develop a prediction equation. Research Questions 1.Is the Mission Perception Inventory (MPI) a valid and reliable reliable measure of student perception of institutional mission? 2.What are the factors in the MPI? 3.Do the factors recur in repeated administrations of the revised MPI? 4.Are the factors equally reliable over time? 5.Can a school’s performance be predicted? scope of research

  5. leaders ofpublic and privateinstitutionsalike are thinking about spirituality these days,as the data suggest that's what theirstudents are thinking about, too (Inside Higher Ed, 2009). • There is strong connection betweeninstitutional programs and student learning environment (Pascarella, 2001). • …institutions influencelevels of engagement on campus as a result ofstructural features, programs, policies, and organizational culture (Kuh et al., 2005). background

  6. GRANTS IN HIGHER EDUCATION FOR IMPROVED ASSESSMENT METHODS design Select the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) as the vehicle for inserting research questions. Assemble a NSSE consortium to jointly engage in research to explore student perception of mission. Develop question items; administer them to the consortium as a NSSE attachment. Test the questions: reliability, factor analysis, and correlation analysis. Repeat annually.

  7. Sense Of Mission Administer Consortium mission questions (20 items) Mission Perception Inventory (MPI) (~19 items) Respect for Diversity Individual Values Spiritual Practice derivation of the MPI and subscales

  8. sense of mission (10 items  = .90) • Themissionof this institution is widely understood by students. • Social and personal development is an important part of the mission. • Ethical and spiritual development of students is important. • This institution offers opportunities for volunteering and community service. • This institution offers opportunities for developing leadershipskills. • There are opportunities for students to strengthen their religious commitment. • This institution’s religious heritageis evident. • Professors here discuss the ethical implications of what is being studied. • As a result of my experience here, I am more aware of my own personal values. • The mission of this institution is reflected in courseofferings.

  9. respect for diversity(5 items  = .878) The faculty, staff, and students here… respect different religions respect different races and cultures ……………………………………………………………………………… Students feel free to express individual spirituality. Different sexual orientations are accepted. The environment encourages appreciation of diversity.

  10. GRANTS IN HIGHER EDUCATION FOR IMPROVED ASSESSMENT METHODS administration The NSSE survey with attached Mission Perception Inventory (MPI) questions has been administered 182 times to close to 50,000 first-year and senior students at 112 unique institutions across the United States every year since 2004.

  11. Consortia institutions and respondents by year

  12. Do the factors recur in repeated administrations of the revised Mission Perception Inventory (MPI)

  13. Are the factors equally reliable over time?

  14. GRANTS IN HIGHER EDUCATION FOR IMPROVED ASSESSMENT METHODS (MPI)Mission PerceptionInventory Report

  15. GRANTS IN HIGHER EDUCATION FOR IMPROVED ASSESSMENT METHODS Teagle Foundation Research Continues 2009… • Develop the Mission Engagement Index. • Obtain NSSE 2009 consortia data • Test using reliability analysis to • produce factors • Distribute MPI reports • Compare consortia results • Conduct regression analysis to create the new index • Use the Mission Engagement Index (MEI) to assess performance.

  16. NSSE 2008 Benchmark Statistics by Consortia

  17. Does the Mission Engagement Indexdescribe causal relationships among variables that affect mission perception? • Dependent variable (Institution score) • Mission Perception Inventory • Sense of Mission scale • Respect for Diversity scale • Independent variables (2008 data; need 15 cases per variable*) • Selectivity 15 institutions • Enrollment 30 institutions • Urbanicity 45 institutions • Resident% 60 institutions • Female% 75 institutions • Another? 90 institutions *…a recommended ratio of subjects to IVs of at least 15 to 1 will provide a reliable regression equation (Stevens, 1992).

  18. Selecting IVs for regression analysis

  19. Is there sufficient variability? participating institutions by region 2008 = 2 consortia, 54 institutions

  20. Is there sufficient variability? “urbanicity” of participating institutions 2008

  21. MPI 2008 Scales:Comparison of means by institution type

  22. Correlation of regression variables with MPI mean

  23. Deriving coefficientsfor the Mission Engagement Index (MEI)

  24. Correlation of regression variables with Mission scale mean

  25. Predictive Equation* Institution Predicted MPI Score = (Beta1)*(Value of “setting”) (-0.414)*(1, 2, or 3) (Beta2)*(Value of “institution type”)+ (0.345)*(1 or 2) Constant (3.687) *Mortenson, T. (1997). Actual Vs Predicted institutional graduation rates for 1100 Colleges and universities. Opportunity, 58.

  26. ProposedMission Engagement Index • The MEI will compare actual versus predicted scores on mission constructs. • Progress on mission effectiveness can be assessed by comparing MEI outcomes to institutional goals.

  27. Sample Mission Engagement Index (MEI) by Institution Type and Setting

  28. No rest for the weary… • For statistical regression, cross validation with a second sample is highly recommended (Tabachnick, p. 153).

  29. References Inside Higher Education (2009). Spiritual accountability. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/layout/set/pri...assessment/01/02/2007/News Kuh, D. G., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., and Whitt, E. J. (2005). Never let it rest: lessons about student success from high-performing colleges and universities. Change, 37(4), 44-51. Mortenson, T. (1997). Actual Vs predicted institutional graduation rates for 1100 colleges and universities. Opportunity, 58. Pacarella, E. T. (2001). Identifying excellence in undergraduate education. Change, 33(3), 18-27. Stevens, J. P. (1992). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (2nd edition). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum. Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidel, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statics, third edition. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

  30. Discussion:

  31. Supported by a grant from http://www.teaglefoundation.org/grantmaking/grantees/assessmentmethods.aspx Institutional Characteristics & Student Perception of Mission: What Makes a Difference? Ellen Boylan, Ph.D. Director of Institutional Research and Assessment eboylan@marywood.edu Office of Planning and Institutional Research http://cwis.marywood.edu/instresearch/activity.stm Marywood University

  32. MPI Mission Perception Inventory Institutional Characteristics and Student Perception of Mission: What Makes a Difference? Ellen Boylan, Ph.D. ● Marywood University NEAIR 36th Annual Conference ● Baltimore, Maryland ● Nov. 7 – 10 , 2009

More Related