1 / 44

Campus-wide Presentation May 14, 2008

2008 PACE Results. Campus-wide Presentation May 14, 2008. Presentation Outline . NILIE Model PACE administration at HCC Findings Quantitative Comparisons Qualitative Comments Next Steps. PACE Model. Climate Factors. Institutional Structure.

chance
Télécharger la présentation

Campus-wide Presentation May 14, 2008

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. 2008 PACE Results Campus-wide Presentation May 14, 2008

  2. Presentation Outline • NILIE Model • PACE administration at HCC • Findings • Quantitative Comparisons • Qualitative Comments • Next Steps

  3. PACE Model Climate Factors Institutional Structure Outcome Driver Supervisory Relationships StudentSuccess Leadership Student Focus Teamwork

  4. PACE Administration • PACE administered at HCC in 2005 and 2008 • PACE survey 2008 • 46 questions • 10 HCC customized questions • 6 background questions • 2 open ended questions • Analysis • Completed by NILIE

  5. 2005 and 2008 PACE Response Rates by Employee Classification

  6. 2005 and 2008 PACE Response Rates by Employee Classification

  7. Analysis of Results • Quantitative comparisons • 2005 to 2008 • NILIE norm base • Employee classification • CAC evaluation • Qualitative analysis of narrative comments

  8. NILIE Quantitative Analysis Approach • Compute • Average response score for each PACE item • Average response score for each Climate Factor • Average response score for total PACE survey • Analysis Groups • All respondents • Respondents by Employee Classification

  9. 2008 Quantitative Results Findings Improvements are comprehensive and dramatic HCC outperforms the PACE Norm Group HCC ratings among the highest seen in campuses administering PACE

  10. HCC and Norm Base Results2005 and 2008 Collaborative Consultative Competitive Coercive

  11. Deans/Administration 2005 and 2008 Collaborative Consultative Competitive Coercive

  12. Tenure Faculty2005 and 2008 Collaborative Consultative Competitive Coercive

  13. Faculty-Term Appointment2005 and 2008 Collaborative Consultative Competitive Coercive

  14. Staff2005 and 2008 Collaborative Consultative Competitive Coercive

  15. PACE Item Results • Leadership Level • Areas of Excellence • Areas with Opportunities for Improvement

  16. Items by Leadership Level 0

  17. Items by Leadership Level 0

  18. Areas of Excellence • 10 items with the highest average response score • Areas with Opportunities for Improvement • 10 items with the lowest average response score

  19. 10 Areas of ExcellenceCampus Average Response Scores

  20. 10 Areas of Excellence Campus Average Response Scores

  21. 10 Areas with Opportunities for Improvement Campus Average Response Scores

  22. 10 Areas with Opportunities for Improvement Campus Average Response Scores

  23. Narrative Comments • NILIE analysis approach • NILIE staff reviewed each written comment • NILIE staff mapped all comments to PACE items • NILIE selected the examples of narrative responses to include in the final report • NILIE analysis approach for Narrative Comments is consistent among all colleges

  24. Summary of Narrative Comments • 47.9% of respondents provided at least one narrative comment • Slightly more favorable comments were received than unfavorable • Majority of favorable comments touched on all climate factors • Vast majority of unfavorable comments focused on Institutional Structure • Many unfavorable comments offered suggestions for improvement

  25. 47.9% of respondents provided written comments

  26. Narrative Comments in the 10 Areas of Excellence

  27. Narrative Comments in the 10 Areas of Excellence

  28. Narrative Comments in the 10 Areas with Opportunities for Improvement

  29. Narrative Comments in the 10 Areas with Opportunities for Improvement

  30. CAC Results • Participation in Governance • HCC customized questions • Is the College Advisory Council (CAC) Fulfilling its Role and Purpose?

  31. Participation in Governance • 61% Attended a CAC meeting or function • 67% Served on a campus-wide committee or task force in past 2 years

  32. HCC Customized Questions

  33. How well is the CAC Fulfilling Its Purpose and Role?

  34. How well is the CAC Fulfilling Its Purpose and Role?

  35. CAC Results2005 and 2008 Collaborative Consultative Competitive Coercive

  36. Narrative Comments on the HCC Customized Questions

  37. Narrative Comments on the HCC Customized Questions

  38. Narrative Comments on the CAC Questions

  39. Narrative Comments on the CAC Questions

  40. 2008 PACE Summary Improvements are comprehensive and dramatic HCC outperforms the PACE Norm Group Improvements by Employee Classifications Validation of the 10 Areas of Excellence Opportunities for Improvement supported by narrative comments CAC has received detailed information critical for setting goals and planning

  41. To Learn More Visit the IR website to view 2005 and 2008 PACE reports 2008 PACE Results Powerpoint presentation

  42. Using the Results at HCC • College Advisory Council • FAC • AAC • SAC • CAC Open Forums • Divisions and Departments • Strategic Planning Assessment Committee • President’s Staff • Dean’s Group • Supervisor’s Group

  43. Questions????

More Related