National Survey of Student Engagement

1. National Survey of Student Engagement “Provides data to use • for improving undergraduate education, • inform state accountability and accreditation efforts, and • facilitate national and sector benchmarking efforts.”

2. The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE): • is designed to assess the extent to which students are engaged in empirically derived good educational practices and what they gain from their college experience (Kuh, 2001). • represents student behaviors that are highly correlated with many desirable learning and personal development outcomes of college. • requires that students reflect on what they are putting into and getting out of their college experience.

3. NSSE Administration • First Year Students and Senior Students • February 2002 • Mailout from NSSE on NAU letterhead • Responses by either mail or web • 42% response rate (551 respondents)

4. Benchmarked Constructs Level of Academic Challenge Active and Collaborative Learning Student-Faculty Interactions Enriching Educational Experiences Supportive Campus Environment

5. Compared to What? NAU vs. Doctoral-Intensives (means and %ile) NAU vs. Nation (means and %ile) NAU Actual vs. NAU Predicted NAU Actual vs. NAU Goal

6. Level of Academic Challenge(description of construct) Challenging intellectual and creative work is central to student learning and collegiate quality. Colleges and universities promote high levels of student achievement by emphasizing the importance of academic effort and setting high expectations for student performance.

7. Level of Academic Challenge (sample items) • Time spent preparing for class • number of assigned textbooks . . . • number of written papers or reports • coursework emphasizing the analysis of the basic elements of an idea, experience or theory • working harder than you thought you could to meet an instructor’s standards • campus environment emphasizing time studying on academic work

8. Level of Academic Challenge (NAU and comparisons)

9. Level of Academic Challenge(comparisons) • NAU First Year: • 50-59th %ile of Doctoral-Intensives • 40-49th %ile Nationally • NAU Seniors: • 60-69th %ile of Doctoral-Intensives • 50-59th %ile Nationally • First Year: • Same as Doc-Intensive • Same as Nation • Better than Predicted • Seniors: • Better than Doc-Intensive • Same as Nation • Better than Predicted

10. Active and Collaborative Learning(description of construct) Students learn more when they are intensely involved in their education and asked to think about what they are learning in different settings. Collaborating with others in solving problems or mastering difficult material prepares students for the messy unscripted problems they will encounter daily during and after college.

11. Active and Collaborative Learning(sample items) • Asked questions in class or contributed to class discussions • Made a class presentation • Worked with other students on projects during class • Worked with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments • Tutored or taught other students • Participated in a community-based project as part of a class • Discussed ideas from classes with other outside class

12. Active and Collaborative Learning(NAU and comparisons)

13. Active and Collaborative Learning(comparisons) • NAU First Years: • 80-89th %ile of Doctoral-Intensives • 60-69th %ile Nationally • NAU Seniors: • 90-99th %ile of Doctoral-Intensives • 70-79th %ile Nationally • First Years: • MuchBetter than Doc-Int • MuchBetter than Nation • MuchBetter than Predicted • Seniors: • MuchBetter than Doc-Int. • Much Better than Nation • Much Better than Predicted

14. Student-Faculty Interactions(description of construct) Students learn firsthand how experts think about and solve practical problems by interacting with faculty members inside and outside the classroom. As a result, their teachers become role models, mentors, and guides for continuous, life-long learning.

15. Student-Faculty Interactions(sample items) • Discussed grades or assignments with an instructor • Talked about career plans with a faculty member or advisor • Discussed ideas from your readings or classes with a faculty member outside of class • Worked with faculty members on activities other than coursework • Received prompt feedback from faculty on your academic performance • Worked with a faculty member on a research project ourside of course or program requirements

16. Student-Faculty Interactions(NAU and comparisons

17. Student-Faculty Interactions (comparisons) • NAU First Years: • 50-59th %ile of Doctoral-Intensives • 40-49th %ile Nationally • NAU Seniors: • 60-69th %ile of Doctoral-Intensives • 50-59th %ile Nationally • First Years: • Somewhat Better than Doc-Intensives • Somewhat Worse than Nation • Somewhat Better than Predicted • Seniors: • Better than Doc-Intensives • Same as Nation • Same as Predicted

18. Enriching Educational Experiences(description of construct) Complementary learning opportunities in and out of the classroom augment academic programs. Diversity experiences teach students valuable things about themselves and others. Technology facilitates collaboration between peers and instructors. Internships, community service, and senior capstone courses provide opportunities to integrate and apply knowledge.

19. Enriching Educational Experiences(sample items) • Participating in co-curricular activities • Practicum, internship field-experience, co-op experience, or clinical assignment • Community service or volunteer work • Independent study • Culminating senior experience • Serious conversations with students of different race or ethnicity, religious beliefs, political opinions, personal values • Using electronic technology to discuss or complete and assignment

20. Enriching Educational Experiences(NAU and comparisons)

21. Enriching Educational Experiences(comparisons) • NAU First Years: • 60-69th %ile of Doctoral-Intensives • 60-69th %ile Nationally • NAU Seniors: • 60-69th %ile of Doctoral-Intensives • 40-49th %ile Nationally • First Years: • Somewhat Better than Doc-Int • Somewhat Better than Nation • Better than Predicted • Seniors: • Somewhat Better than Doc-Int. • Somewhat Worse than Nation • Worse than Predicted

22. Supportive Campus Environment(description of construct) Students perform better and are more satisfiedat colleges that are committed to their success as well as the working and social relations among different groups on campus.

23. Supportive Campus Environment(items) • Campus environment provides the support you need to help you succeed academically • . . . helps you cope with your non-academic responsibilities • . . . provides the support you need to thrive socially • Quality of relationships with other students • . . . Faculty members • . . . Administrative personnel and offices

24. Supportive Campus Environment(NAU and comparisons)

25. Supportive Campus Environment(comparisons) • NAU First Years: • 40-49th %ile of Doctoral-Intensives • 20-29th %ile Nationally • NAU Seniors: • 50-59th %ile of Doctoral-Intensives • 20-29th %ile Nationally • First Years: • Somewhat Worse than Doc-Int • Much Worse than Nation • Worse than Predicted • Seniors: • Same as Doc-Int. • Much Worse than Nation • Much Worse than Predicted

26. NAU Strengths: • Active and Collaborative Learning • NAU exceeds in national and peer comparisons • NAU actual greatly exceeds NAU predicted • Level of Academic Challenge • NAU exceeds peers • NAU actual exceeds NAU predicted

27. NAU Mixed Bag • Student Faculty Interactions • okay with Seniors • problems with First Years • Enriching Educational Experiences • okay with First Years • problems with Seniors

28. NAU ProblemSupportive Campus Environment For Seniors the problem items are: Support to succeed academically (much worse) Cope with non-academic responsibilities (much worse) Relationships with admin personnel/offices (a bit worse) For First Years the problem items are: Support to succeed academically  (a bit worse)  Cope with non-academic responsibilities (a bit worse)   Support to thrive socially (worse)    Relationships with faculty (a bit worse)           Relationships with admin personnel/offices  (much worse)