March 3, 2010. TAIR, Waco, TX

Now You See Them, Now You Don’t! The Role of Part-Time Students and Faculty in Student Engagement

CCSSE: Listening to StudentsGoal

To provide member colleges with results that can be used to inform decision making and target institutional improvements.

2009 CCSSE Cohort

• 400,000 Students

• 663 colleges

• 48 states, British Columbia, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Marshall Islands

Community College Faculty Survey of Student Engagement (CCFSSE)

Faculty teaching practices, the ways they spend their professional time both in and out of class, and their perceptions regarding students’ educational experiences

Is aligned with CCSSE to allow colleges to contrast student and faculty perceptions

Who’s in this research?Texas CCSSE & CCFSSE Classes in 2009

• 32 Colleges

• 690 Classes

• 8,000 Students

• 600 Faculty members

Part-time Isn’t Just about Students

Class Time: Part-time faculty have more part-time students in their classes.

Texas CCSSE & CCFSSE Classes in 2009

Part-time Students

Full-timeStudents

Part-time Faculty

Full-timeFaculty

Morning 50% 65% 42% 64%

Afternoon 19% 25% 22% 25%

Evening 31% 10% 31% 11%

Part-time Isn’t Just about Students

Benchmarks: Part-time students from the classes taught by part-time faculty have the

lowest benchmarks.Texas CCSSE & CCFSSE Classes in 2009

FacultyActive and

Collaborative Learning

Student Effort

Academic Challenge

Student-Faculty

Interaction

Support for Learners

Part-time Students

Part-time 43.6 46.5 45.9 45.1 49.2

Full-time 45.8 46.8 47.4 45.7 50.5

Full-time Students

Part-time 53.3 54.3 54.4 52.1 52.9

Full-time 55.0 53.9 54.7 53.6 56.3

Expectations: Students and FacultyStudent Stem: During the current school year,

how much has your coursework at this college emphasized the following activities?

Faculty Stem: During the current school year, how much does the coursework in your selected course section emphasize the following mental activities?

Community College Survey of Student Engagement

5b. Analyzing the basic elements of an idea, experience, or theory 5c. Synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences

in new ways5d. Making judgments about the value or soundness of

information, arguments, or methods5e. Applying theories or concepts to practical problems or in new

situations5f. Having students use information they have read or heard to

perform a new skill

9a. Encouraging students to spend significant amounts of time studying (slightly different stem)

Response scale: 1= Very Little, 2 = Some, 3 = Quite a Bit, 4= Very Much

Expectations: Students vs Faculty

`

Community College Survey of Student Engagement

Students FacultyT-testProb.

EffectSize

Sig.N Mean N Mean

8012 2.806 608 2.967 < .001 .25 Yes

He digs down into the details and he’s a rigorous teacher…  I thank him for being a rigorous teacher because that helps when I go on.— Male student

“I hate it at the moment, but my favorite teachers are always the ass-kickers … I like to be challenged.”— Male student

Instructor Expectation and Student Engagement

Benchmark Independent Var Model DF Estimate F value Prob > F

Active & Collaborative

Learning

St Enrol Status

4,7989

-9.19 191.54 < .001

Fac Emp Status -1.78 8.8 < .01

Fac Expectation 2.49 27.55 < .001         

Student EffortSt Enrol Status

4,7989-7.13 126.48 < .001

Fac Expectation 1.68 13.07 < .001         

Academic Challenge

St Enrol Status4,7988

-7.22 142.12 < .001

Fac Expectation 2.42 28.23 < .001         

Student-Faculty

Interaction

St Enrol Status4,7988

-7.78 124.33 < .001

Fac Expectation 1.58 11.75 < .001

         

Support for Learners

St Enrol Status

4,7972

-5.80 48.93 < .001

Fac Emp Status -3.37 11.43 < .001

Fac Expectation 1.24 6.98 < .01

Community College Survey of Student Engagement

Instructor Expectations & Student Behaviors

Dependent Var Independent Var Model DF Estimate F value Prob > F

Prepare 2+ drafts of a paper or

assignment

St Enrol Status

4,7936

-.23 90.78 < .001

Fac Emp Status .09 5.2 < .05

Fac Expectation .08 17.13 < .001

Come to class unprepared

St Enrol Status4,7918

.09 22.6 < .001

Fac Expectation .02 2.76 < .1

Received prompt

feedback

St Enrol Status

4,7914

.10 3.28 < .08

St * Fac Status .11 5.43 < .02

Fac Expectation .05 10.22 < .01

Skipped ClassSt Enrol Status

4,7962.10 47.7 < .001

Fac Expectation .0 2.81 < .1

Community College Survey of Student Engagement

Discussion• PT students more likely to be taught by PT

faculty.

• Students appear to perceive that faculty have lower expectations than faculty report

• FT students tend to have higher engagement scores, but mixed results with regard to specific behaviors.

• Faculty expectations related to student engagement and behaviors.

Community College Survey of Student Engagement

Not critical of PT facultyInstitutional environments and procedures that may contribute to the differences between PT and FT faculty.

• PT faculty not required to have office hours

• PT faculty do not have offices

• PT faculty not required to participate in professional development that FT faculty attend

Ask yourself: At my campus is there a group of courses continuously with low passing/completion? Who teaches these courses?

Community College Survey of Student Engagement

Contact Information

Mike Bohlig, Ph.D.Senior Research Associate512-232-6456bohlig@ccsse.org

Beiyi CaiResearch Associatecai@ccsse.org

www.ccsse.org

Community College Survey of Student Engagement