1 / 23

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE):

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE):. Overview of 2008 Results for Rutgers University. What is NSSE. Seeks to assess: Types and levels of engagement students have with their present institution Benefits and gains students derive from the college experience

leandra-boyer
Télécharger la présentation

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE):

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. National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE): Overview of 2008 Results for Rutgers University

  2. What is NSSE Seeks to assess: • Types and levels of engagement students have with their present institution • Benefits and gains students derive from the college experience Emerges from long tradition that suggests: • Student engagement leads to successful development and learning • Institutions with high levels and wide varieties of student engagement are of high quality

  3. Survey Administration Survey administered nationwide to undergraduates: • Annually administered during spring semester • Open to all four year colleges and universities • First survey administered in spring 2000 • Nearly 800 colleges and universities in 2008 • Periodic administration (2, 3 or 4 year cycle) preferred choice At each participating institution: • Both first year students and seniors are surveyed • Sampling schemes are employed when student population is large • Surveys are administered via the Web, paper, or both

  4. NSSE Content Survey includes: • Over 80 questions (plus 20 additional AAU items for New Brunswick) • 14 main sections • Some self-identifying questions are asked • Response sets vary but limited (usually 4 non-neutral categories) Student responses distilled into five basic constructs of student engagement: • level of academic challenge (11 items) • student-faculty interaction (6 items) • active and collaborative learning (7 items) • enriching educational experiences (12 items) • supportive campus environment (6 items)

  5. Uses of NSSE Enables: • Institutional/campus level analysis (with further disaggregation/subgroup analysis also possible) • Benchmarking (with self-selected groupings of schools) • Performance tracking (comparisons over time) Useful for: • Public accountability (incorporated into VSA) • Assessment (mostly indirect measures of student learning) • Institutional planning

  6. Rutgers Participation and Response Rates

  7. New Brunswick Results

  8. New Brunswick Peer Institutions – 2008 • Three Groupings • 1st group includes peers used for campus dashboard indicators (public AAU schools) Indiana University University of North Carolina Iowa State University University of Stony Brook-SUNY University at Buffalo-SUNY University of Texas University of Florida University of Virginia University of Iowa University of Wisconsin University of Illinois • 2nd group includes institutions with same Carnegie Classification (above plus 14 others) • 3rd group includes universe of all 2008 NSSE participants

  9. Respondent Profiles – 2008 When comparing New Brunswick to its Dashboard Peers, - we find the following similarities with: First Year StudentsSeniors AGE GENDER GENDER INTERNATIONAL STATUS INTERNATIONAL STATUS ENROLLMENT STATUS (FT/PT) ENROLLMENT STATUS (FT/PT) ATHLETIC STATUS ATHLETIC STATUS RESIDENTIAL STUDENTS - we find the following dissimilarities with: First Year Students Seniors LESS 2ND YEAR STUDENTS SAMPLED STUDENTS ARE OLDER MORE MINORITY STUDENTS MORE MINORITY STUDENTS LESS GREEK AFFILIATIONS MORE STUDENTS STARTED COLLEGE ELSEWHERE LESS STUDENTS RECEIVING B+ OR BETTER MORE PRESENTLY ENROLLED PT STUDENTS MORE FIRST GENERATION STUDENTS SLIGHTLY LESS STUDENTS RECEIVING B+ OR BETTER SLIGHTLY MORE COMMUTERS MORE RESIDENTIAL AND OFF-CAMPUS STUDENTS MORE LIBERAL ARTS FOCUSED STUDENTS LESS COMMUTER STUDENTS MORE FIRST GENERATION STUDENTS MORE LIBERAL ARTS FOCUSED STUDENTS

  10. Comparisons of Student Engagement:New Brunswick vs. Dashboard Peers * p<05; **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)

  11. Comparisons of Student Engagement:New Brunswick 2005 vs. 2008

  12. Dashboard View of Responses forRutgers - New Brunswick • Many of the items shown have large percentages of positive and negative responses for both first year students and seniors • Rutgers respondents show little or no difference from students attending peer institutions on a majority of survey items • Most of the differences with AAU peers are in the negative direction • Positive differences are mostly experienced by first year students

  13. Dashboard View of Responses forRutgers - New Brunswick, continued • High levels of satisfaction at RU-NB for both first year students and seniors • High percentages of first year students and seniors state they would attend Rutgers if they had to do it over again • Despite these high percentages RU still trails its peers on satisfaction measures • First year students give high grades to academic advising • High rates of negative responses were given by both first year students and seniors on items related to “enriching educational experiences” • Students at NB are less satisfied with the size and quality of instruction of upper-division courses than students at AAU peers • Time usage is a particular issue for seniors – Rutgers seniors work more for pay off-campus and spend more time providing care for dependents and having to commute • Rutgers seniors also trail students at peer institutions in feeling that the institution they presently attend has contributed to their use of informational technology and working effectively with others

  14. Newark Results

  15. Newark Peer Institutions – 2008 • Three Groupings • 1st group includes peers used for campus dashboard indicators Florida International University University of Buffalo-SUNY University of Maryland-Baltimore County University of Massachusetts-Boston University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Virginia Commonwealth University • 2nd group includes institutions with same Carnegie Classification (44 in total) • 3rd group includes universe of all 2008 NSSE participants

  16. Respondent Profiles – 2008 When comparing Newark to its Dashboard Peers, - we find the following similarities with: First Year StudentsSeniors INTERNATIONAL STATUS INTERNATIONAL STATUS ATHLETIC STATUS ATHLETIC STATUS (LIMITED) PARTICIPATION IN GREEK LIFE (LIMITED) PARTICIPATION IN GREEK LIFE DISTRIBUTION OF LIBERAL ARTS AND DISTRIBUTION OF GRADES ATTAINED AT INSTITUTION PROFESSIONAL MAJORS RESIDENTIAL STUDENTS DISTRIBUTION OF LIBERAL ARTS AND PROFESSIONAL MAJORS - we find the following dissimilarities with: First Year StudentsSeniors STUDENTS ARE YOUNGER STUDENTS ARE OLDER MORE FEMALE STUDENTS MORE FEMALE STUDENTS MORE MINORITY STUDENTS MORE MINORITY STUDENTS LESS 2ND YEAR STUDENTS SAMPLED MORE STUDENTS STARTED COLLEGE ELSEWHERE LESS STUDENTS STARTED ELSEWHERE MORE PRESENTLY ENROLLED PART-TIME STUDENTS LESS PART TIME STUDENTS LESS OFF-CAMPUS STUDENTS; LESS STUDENTS CURRENTLY RECEIVING MORE COMMUTER STUDENTS B+ OR BETTER MORE FIRST GENERATION STUDENTS LESS RESIDENTIAL AND OFF-CAMPUS STUDENTS; MORE COMMUTERS MORE FIRST GENERATION STUDENTS

  17. Comparisons of Student Engagement:Newark vs. Dashboard Peers * p<05; **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)

  18. Dashboard View of Responses for Rutgers - Newark • Rutgers respondents show little or no difference from dashboard peers and other institutions on a majority of survey items • Most of the differences with dashboard peers are in the negative direction • Positive differences exist mostly with seniors • Responses to many academic challenge and educational/personal growth items are positive • As with NB, students at Newark have high rates of negative responses to many items related to “enriching educational experiences” • Time usage is an issue for both first year students and seniors at Newark • Seniors at Newark exceed fellow seniors at peer institutions in hours working for pay off-campus and caring for a dependent • Time spent commuting to class is a problem for both first year students and seniors • Rutgers-Newark is rated highly by many of its first year students and seniors in terms of overall satisfaction with their educational experience and willingness to attend Rutgers-Newark if they could start their undergraduate career over again.

  19. Camden Results

  20. Camden Peer Institutions – 2008 • Three Groupings • 1st group includes peers used for campus dashboard indicators Ramapo College of New Jersey The Richard Stockton College of New Jersey The State University of New York at Geneseo University of Maryland-Baltimore County Western Connecticut State University William Paterson University of New Jersey (non-dashboard peer added) • Second group includes institutions with same Carnegie Classification (83 in total) • Third group includes universe of all 2008 NSSE participants

  21. Respondent Profiles – 2008 When comparing Camden to its Dashboard Peers, - we find the following similarities with: First Year StudentsSeniors AGE GENDER INTERNATIONAL STATUS INTERNATIONAL STATUS ENROLLMENT STATUS (FT/PT) RACIAL/ETHNIC DISTRIBUTION ATHLETIC STATUS ENROLLMENT STATUS (FT/PT) ATHLETIC STATUS DISTRIBUTION OF GRADES ATTAINED AT INSTITUTION - we find the following dissimilarities with: First Year StudentsSeniors MORE MALES STUDENTS STUDENTS ARE OLDER MORE MINORITY STUDENTS MORE STUDENTS STARTED COLLEGE ELSEWHERE LESS 2ND YEAR STUDENTS SAMPLED LESS GREEK AFFILIATIONS LESS GREEK AFFILIATIONS LESS RESIDENTIAL AND OFF-CAMPUS STUDENTS; LESS STUDENTS CURRENTLY RECEIVING MORE COMMUTER STUDENTS B+ OR BETTER MORE FIRST GENERATION STUDENTS LESS RESIDENTIAL STUDENTS; MORE COMMUTERS MORE PROFESSIONAL FOCUSED STUDENTS MORE FIRST GENERATION STUDENTS MORE PROFESSIONAL FOCUSED STUDENTS

  22. Comparisons of Student Engagement:Camden vs. Dashboard Peers * p<05; **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)

  23. Dashboard View of Responses for Rutgers-Camden • Most of the differences with dashboard peers exist among first year students • First year students give high rates of approval to items of educational and personal growth, but these students rate these items at lower levels then students at dashboard peer institutions • Time usage is an issue for both first year students and seniors • Seniors indicate lower levels of participation in co-curricular activities, internship and co-op experiences, and study abroad participation than seniors attending dashboard peer institutions • Academic advising is rated as good or excellent by over 75 percent of first year students, and exceeds the level of satisfaction of students at dashboard peer institutions • Similarly, most first year students and seniors are satisfied with Rutgers-Camden

More Related