1 / 32

Undergraduate Student Success and Retention 3rd Annual Report to the Board of Governors Presented January 30, 2008

Undergraduate Student Success and Retention 3rd Annual Report to the Board of Governors Presented January 30, 2008. Contents. Retention Challenges One- and Two-Year Retention Rates Four- and Six-Year Graduation Rates Update on Retention Initiatives. 2. What are our retention challenges?.

madison
Télécharger la présentation

Undergraduate Student Success and Retention 3rd Annual Report to the Board of Governors Presented January 30, 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. Undergraduate Student Success and Retention3rd Annual Report to the Board of GovernorsPresented January 30, 2008

  2. Contents Retention Challenges One- and Two-Year Retention Rates Four- and Six-Year Graduation Rates Update on Retention Initiatives 2

  3. What are our retention challenges? 3

  4. Factors for Retention – What National Studies Show Residential students retained better WSU: Approximately 80% of students commute Better-prepared students (ACT, high school rigor, etc.) retained better WSU: Average ACT approximately 20.5. More freshmen report need for remedial work than other urban or comparably selective schools Full time students more likely to graduate than part-time WSU: 60% full time, 40% part time Financial need leads to greater attrition WSU: Over half have median household incomes below $50,000 4

  5. One- and Two-Year Retention RatesFirst-time, Full-time, Degree-Seeking, Only How Are Our Students Measuring Up? 5

  6. Retention by Institution Type 1-Year Retention (percentage of students retained) Consortium for Student Retention Data Exchange, National study of first-time, full-time freshmen entering college in fall of 2000 (retained through 2001) and 2005 cohorts (retained through 2006). 6

  7. WSU 1-Year Retention (percentage of students retained) ‘96 ’97 ’98 ‘99 ‘00 ’01 ‘02 ‘03 ‘04 ‘05 ‘06 Budget, Planning, and Analysis. 7

  8. WSU 2-Year Retention (percentage of students retained) ‘96 ’97 ’98 ‘99 ‘00 ’01 ‘02 ‘03 ‘04 ‘05 Budget, Planning, and Analysis. 8

  9. 1st-Year Retention Rate:Select WSU Groups Fall 2004, 2005, and 2006 freshmen cohort retained one year. Note: Honors indicates enrollment in the Honors Program; Presidential Scholars is a scholarship award. Budget, Planning, and Analysis 9

  10. 2nd-Year Retention Rate:Select WSU Groups 2004 2005 2004 2005 2004 2005 2004 2005 Fall 2004 and 2005 freshmen cohort retained two years. Budget, Planning, and Analysis 10

  11. Retention Comparison:Alternative Admission Programs 1st Year Retention Rates ‘03 ‘04 ‘05 ‘03 ‘04 ‘05 ’06 ‘03 ‘04 ‘05 ‘06 Fall 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006 freshmen cohort retained one year. Budget, Planning, and Analysis 11

  12. Retention Comparison:Alternative Admission Programs 2nd Year Retention Rates ‘03 ‘04 ‘05 ‘03 ‘04 ‘05 ‘03 ‘04 ‘05 Fall 2003, 2004, and 2005 freshmen cohort retained two years. Budget, Planning, and Analysis 12

  13. Pell Grant v. Non-Pell Grant Recipients (percentage of students retained) Fall 2003 freshmen cohort retained to fall 2004 and 2005, respectively. Office of Testing, Evaluation, and Research 13

  14. Four- and Six-Year Graduation Rates (First-time, full-time, degree-seeking cohorts only) 14

  15. Graduation Comparison:All Students (percentage of students graduated) ‘96 ‘96 ‘00 ‘00 ‘99 ‘99 ’97 ’97 ‘98 ‘98 ’03 ’03 ‘01 ‘01 ‘02 ‘02 First-time, full-time freshmen cohorts entering college in fall 1996- fall 2002. Budget, Planning, and Analysis 15

  16. 1997 First-time, Full-time Cohort through 8th Year 16

  17. Update on Retention Initiatives – F07 • President’s Faculty Task Force on Retention • Advising and Support - Early Intervention • Learning Communities • Orientation and iStart • Math Initiatives • Policy Changes 17

  18. President’s Faculty Task Force on Retention Charge Co-Chairs: Dr. Joseph Dunbar, Physiology, School of Medicine Dr. Lisa Rapport, Psychology, Liberal Arts and Sciences Develop recommendations to achieve substantial increase in student retention and graduation rates overall and for particular sub-groups of students. Consider faculty issues, policy issues, programmatic changes, and other ideas as appropriate. 18

  19. President’s Faculty Task Force on Retention Liaison and Advisory Committees • Met during the Winter Semester and through the Spring/Summer to gather and analyze data. • Formed Sub-committees • Standards • Barriers and Access • Interventions • Met with each college/school retention committee to receive input • Have developed draft recommendations that will be posted on the web for faculty comment/input • Final report in April 19

  20. Advising and Student Services Initiatives Degree Audit • Prototype completed and being tested in University Advising for General Education • Will be available in pilot form to students beginning in Winter, 08 • Full audits completed for key curricula and being tested – all curricula will be entered by the end of 2008-2009 Advising Council • Advising Council formed and meeting regularly • Members represent all schools and colleges and University Advising • Agenda: Degree Audit, communication, coordinated service to students 20

  21. Advising and Student Services Inititaives Early Academic Assessment Faculty provide early assessments to students in 1000 and 2000 level courses between weeks two and seven: • “grade” on Pipeline (equivalent to a C-, D, or F) • email explanation • invitation to seek help and participate in Success 101 on line WayneREACH Intervention for students on academic probation • Special advising sessions: study issues, course selection • Administered motivational Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) • Provided checklist of strategies for identified problem areas 21

  22. WayneReach Survey Results • Do you work while attending school? • 56% - yes • 44% - No • Did you seek help when you realized you were • Experiencing academic difficulties? • 29% - Yes • 71% - No • What challenges contributed to your academic • difficulties? • 65% - Poor study skills • 19% - Family/personal issues • 8% - Instructor/course issues • 8% - Work 22

  23. Learning Communities What makes Learning Communities Effective? • Build group identity, cohesion • Overcome isolation • Develop a sense of purpose • Interact with peers – peer mentors • Interact with faculty and staff 23

  24. Fall 07 Learning Communities All Start Learning Community for the MTTC Test (New Business for F07) Center for Chicano-Boricua Studies LS-AMP Comerica Scholars (Baker, Detroit STRONG Learning Community Compact, Thompson, Wade-McCree Military Veterans DCE Learning Community Motown/Global Community (New for F07) Engineering Bridge Mentorship Program Pre-Morris Hood Scholars Education: First Year Exp. (NEW for F07) Student Nurses Achieving Academic Success ESP Math Health Sciences Honors Teacher Education (New for F07) Introduction to Education (New for F07) Instructional Technology (IT) On Tap Kinesiology Level I (New for F07) TRIO Math Learning Community 24

  25. Learning Communities LC Retention: 78.5% (68.9% - all first-time students) Fall 2006 to Fall 2007 – LC Data 25

  26. Learning Communities Fall 2006 to Fall 2007 – LC Data 26

  27. Orientation and iStart Orientation • Over 2000 students attended • Small group advising • Students given advising checklist • Special effort to make sure courses were available iStart: New Student Program • 423 Participants (up from 75 in the pilot year) • Began with Convocation and continued for a day and a half (social activities, team building, study skills, etc.) • Student reviews were excellent 27

  28. Math Initiatives • ESP – Emerging Scholars Program • For students pursuing degrees in Science, Engineering, Medicine, Mathematics, or Math Education • ESP sections offered for MAT 1050, 1800, 2010, and 2020 • Large proportion of students are from the inner city and have lower high school GPA’s and ACT scores than those in the non-ESP sections. • Students commit to extra workshops sessions and are held to high performance standards 28

  29. Math Initiatives ESP – Emerging Scholars Program Remarkably effective in teaching math to students who otherwise would perform poorly. The study skills they learn appear to minimize or erase earlier educational disparities. Students perform well in courses other than math as well because of the skills they develop. ESP students not only catch up in math, but excel! 29

  30. Math Initiatives MAT 0993 Enhancements • New for Fall 07: mandatory session with face-to-face instructor one day per week to supplement computer-based instruction • Enhanced training for student assistants in Math Lab • Increased intervention by instructor: in class, email, and out-of-class follow up RESULTS Test performance has improved this fall over previous terms – greater pass rates 30

  31. Conclusion • Retention data (1st year, 2nd year) and Graduation data (4-year, 6-year, 8-year) indicate serious challenges. • Initiatives are having some positive effects, but they have not impacted broadly enough to see much retention affect over all. • It must be a top priority for the entire university to turn around our success rates and deliver on our promise of access. • The initiatives in place are being scaled up and 2007-2008 should show more significant gains. 31

  32. Questions ?

More Related