Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
High Impact Practices - HIPs
November 28, 201712-2pmPOD - 372
Today’s Presenters:
Kait Taylor-AsquiniProject Manager, CCR & Student Leadership, Ryerson Student Affairs
x.2128
Lisa EndersbyEducational Developer, York University Teaching Commons
HIGH-IMPACT PRACTICES (HIPs)
The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) describes High Impact Practices (HIPs) as “enriching educational experiences that can be life-changing.”1
1 NSSE - National Survey of Student Engagement. (n.d.). Retrieved March 20, 2017, from http://nsse.indiana.edu/html/high_impact_practices.cfm
Not quite this HIP.
But close.
HIGH IMPACT PRACTICES 1st YEAR SENIOR
Learning Community ✔ ✔
Service Learning ✔ ✔
Research with Faculty ✔ ✔
Internship/Field Experience ✔
Study Abroad ✔
Culminating Senior Experience ✔
NSSE - National Survey of Student Engagement. (n.d.). Retrieved March 20, 2017, from http://nsse.indiana.edu/html/high_impact_practices.cfm
ENGAGEMENT INDICATORS1
THEME ENGAGEMENT INDICATORS
Academic Challenge Higher-Order LearningReflective & Integrative LearningLearning Strategies
Learning with Peers Collaborative LearningDiscussions with Diverse Others
Experiences with Faculty Student-Faculty InteractionEffective Teaching Practices
Campus Environment Quality of InteractionsSupportive Environment
1 NSSE - National Survey of Student Engagement. (n.d.). Retrieved March 20, 2017, from http://nsse.indiana.edu/html/high_impact_practices.cfm
What are you doing?
Ryerson University’s Co-Curricular Recognition Program
LEVEL UP
WHY?“To provide Ryerson students with a way to discover, track, and reflect upon their involvement opportunities.
Ryerson students are eager to participate more fully in their university experience but lack an efficient mechanism through which they can easily identify relevant opportunities to do so.”1
1 Ryerson University’s Co-Curricular Recognition Program: A Proposed Roadmap for Student Engagement, Development, and Achievement
LEVEL UP• Ryerson’s answer to a co-curricular record (CCR)
• A four-level, non-linear program encouraging students to make meaning of their experiences on and off campus, inside and outside of the classroom
• Rooted in theory and closely tied to HIP’s
• Integrated into D2L
• Validated through storytelling
The levels
Some data
THE PILOT• Launched in November 2016
• 153 Total Participants
• Included:
• Student Life student staff• Residence Advisors• SHARP Ambassadors• Lead BLUE members• Any student who registered individually
1st
77%FIRST GENERATION STUDENTS
can explain the importance of on/off campus involvement in the development of the whole student.
can describe their strengths in relationship to their work with others.
can describe how to find new involvement opportunities on ConnectRU.
better understand their learning through experiences they’ve had.
can identify five (5) co-curricular experiences that have prepared them for their future.
would recommend this program to other students.
80.6%
77.4%77.4%78.6%
71.4%
71%
What students said…
THE LAUNCH• September 2017
• Includes platforms for specialized interest groups in addition to main campus.
• 3666 current participants
866ACTIVE ePORTFOLIOS
12ACTIVE
ORGANIZATIONS
Including:
• Campus-Wide (general)• Faculty of Arts (coming soon!)• First Year Science (SCI 180)• CareerBoost On-Campus• Student Life Student Staff• Tri-Mentoring Program• International Student Support• Residence Life Team• Live-Out Team (Residence)• Glocal Links• SHARP• Ryerson Rams – Ghana 2018
LEVEL UP: Arts
Exploring Student Engagement & Retention: An Initial Analysis of Selected LA&PS NSSE Data
Project Goalssince “…[engagement] matters most during the critical first year of college” (Tinto, 2006,
p. 4), the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) that York participates in is a logical place to look for evidence or factors affecting student engagement, which impacts
retention (About NSSE, 2016; Miller, Sarraf, Dumford & Rocconi, n.d.; NSSE Reliability, 2016; Pike, 2012)
• Explore the impact of engagement on retention as defined/demonstrated as part of students’ in class experiences
• Explore and analyze NSSE results as an opportunity to capture and define student engagement at York
• Offer data-driven support for identified faculty challenges related to student engagement & retention
Defining Our TermsRetention
“retention [is] an institutional measure and persistence … [is] a student measure” (Hagedorn, 2005, p. 6)
• Retention: Continued enrollment (or degree completion) within the same institution• Persistence: Continued enrollment (or degree completion) at any institutionhttps://nscresearchcenter.org/snapshotreport-persistenceretention18/
Retention at the University• Given institutional data, we define retention with a focus on students
remaining in program and/or at institution year to year (emphasis on year 1 to year 2)
Defining Our Terms
Engagement
• “the amount of physical and psychological energy that the student devotes to the academic experience” (Astin, 1984, p. 297)
Connecting NSSE, Engagement, and Retention
• “[engagement] matters most during the critical first year of college” (Tinto, 2006, p. 4)
• Pike (2012) studied the validity of the NSSE as a measure of student engagement, finding that “…the NSSE benchmarks appear to be adequate and appropriate measures of student engagement for the purposes of assessment and evaluation…” (p. 165). (excerpt from report)
• Positive engagement can be defined by students’ participation in High Impact Practices (HIPs)
NSSE High Impact PracticesLearning community or some other formal program where groups
of students take two or more classes together
Courses that included a community-based project (service-learning)
Work with a faculty member on a research projectInternship, co-op, field experience, student teaching, or clinical
placementStudy abroad
Culminating senior experience (capstone course, senior project or thesis, comprehensive exam, portfolio, etc)
NSSE Engagement IndicatorsTheme Engagement Indicators
Academic Challenge Higher-Order ThinkingReflective & Integrative Learning
Learning StrategiesQuantitative Reasoning
Learning with Peers Collaborative LearningDiscussions with Diverse Others
Experiences with Faculty Student-Faculty InteractionEffective Teaching Practices
Campus Environment Quality of InteractionsSupportive Environment
High Impact Practices
(Involvement) Opportunities Positively
Associated with Retention
How might/do we engage students on
campus?
e.g. Learning (in) Community
Engagement Indicators
Constructs to Define Engagement
What might/does engagement look like
on campus?
e.g. Collaborative Learning
Include
Inform
Initial Findings• First year students (in three identified academic
programs) are reporting low levels of participation in High Impact Practices (HIPs) against the reported provincial average (NSSE, 2014)
• First year students (in three identified academic programs) are reporting lower scores across NSSE Engagement Indicators (EI) against the reported provincial average (NSSE, 2014)
Connections to Literature• Concurrently, a 2014 university retention study found that ‘leavers’
were more likely to be working for pay and worked considerably more hours per week than ‘stayers’ (Northrup, 2014)
• Students who worked for pay during the school year (12 or more hours per week) had lower GPAs than those who worked fewer hours (Popovic & Green, 2012)
“Students who work 30 or more hours are juggling two lives: a work life and a student life. Their decision to leave is … a reflection on the difficulties of
their dual status as a student and as a worker.” (Northrup, 2014, p. 6)
Connections to Institutional Context• The majority of students today are commuters who could be,
for example, full-time students living with their parents or part-time students working full time in a career and/or who have children (Jacoby, 2000)
• With such a diverse and conflicting array of demands on students’ time outside the classroom, there is renewed interest in exploring how characteristics of High Impact Practices (often defined by NSSE’s Engagement Indicators) could be translated to the in class experience, where the majority of institution-student contact may now occur
Engagement Indicators for In Class Engagement Strategies
How might engagement indicators be translated or integrated into an in class
experience?
Implications for In Class EngagementNSSE High Impact Practice Potential In Class Strategy
(High Impact Experience)1Relevant NSSE Engagement
Indicators
Learning (in) Community Create study groups & facilitate an activity to begin developing positive group dynamics
Collaborative LearningDiscussions with Diverse OthersQuality of Interactions (Peers, Faculty)
Community-Based Project (Service-Learning) & Internship, co-op, field experience, student teaching, or clinical placement
Role play, case study, simulations or other scenario-based activities (facilitating opportunities for students to critically reflect on course content/out of class experiences)
Student-Faculty InteractionsHigher-Order LearningReflective & Integrative LearningCollaborative Learning
Work with a faculty member on a research project
Provide students opportunities to gather, incorporate, and display research findings as part of poster display or research project (collaborative problem-based learning)
Student-Faculty InteractionsHigher-Order LearningQuantitative ReasoningCollaborative Learning
1High Impact Experience (Foote, Baudier, & Stromie, 2017)
Designing Your High Impact Practice
Consider Your Desired Outcomes
What experiences are already available to
students to engage in this activities?
How might you facilitate this
experience inside the classroom?
Engagement Indicator:Collaborative Learning
Collaborating with peers to solve problems or
master difficult material
Engagement Indicator:Higher-Order Learning
Coursework that emphasizes application, analysis, judgment, and
synthesis
Lisa EndersbyEducational Developer (Teaching Commons)
@lmendersby on Twitter
References• About NSSE. (2016). Retrieved from http://nsse.indiana.edu/html/about.cfm
• Astin A. (1984). Student involvement: a developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel 25, 297–308.
• Foote, S. M., Baudier, J. & Stromie, T. (2017, February 11). Using High-Impact Practices to Foster Course Development, Design and Enhancement [PowerPoint slides and PDF document]. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0ByUrpUVB056KelFKUW1YZl9HNjA
• Hagedorn, L.S. (2005). How to define retention: A new look at an old problem. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Linda_Hagedorn/publication/237554795_How_to_define_retention_A_New_Look_at_an_Old_Problem/links/004635346c3c95065d000000.pdf
• Jacoby, B. (2000). Why involve commuter students in learning?. New Directions for Higher Education, 2000(109), 3-12.
• Miller, A. L., Sarraf, S. A., Dumford, A. D., & Rocconi, L. M. (n. d.) Construct validity of NSSE engagement indicators. Retrieved from http://nsse.indiana.edu/pdf/psychometric_portfolio/Validity_ConstructValidity_FactorAnalysis_2013.pdf
• National Student Clearinghouse Reserch Center. (20125, April 22). Snapshot Report – Persistence-Retention. Retrieved from https://nscresearchcenter.org/snapshotreport-persistenceretention18/
• Northrup, D. (2014, October 14). York University 2014 Retention Study.
• NSSE (2007). Experiences that matter: Enhancing student learning and success. (Annual Report 2007). Retrieved from http://nsse.indiana.edu/NSSE_2007_Annual_Report/index.cfm
• NSSE Reliability. (2016). Retrieved from http://nsse.indiana.edu/html/reliability.cfm
• Pike, G. R. (2012). NSSE benchmarks and institutional outcomes: A note on the importance of considering the intended use of a measure in validity studies. Research in Higher Education, 54(2), 149-170.
• Popovic, C. & Green, D. A. (2012). Understanding undergraduates: Challenging our preconceptions of student success. New York, NY: Routledge.
• Tinto, V. (2006). Research and practice of student retention: What next? Journal of College Student Retention, 8(1), 1-19.
• Tinto, V. (2012). Completing college. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
