View
213
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH AND
DECISION-MAKING
Vladimir Briller, Ed.D.Executive Director of Strategic
Planning and Institutional Research
Pratt Institute, New York, U.S.A.Higher School of Economics,
Moscow October 18, 2012
Institutional Research• Institutional Research is the practice
whereby an institution assesses itself, its activities and its position within a given milieu. Higher Education Institutional Research offices conduct these assessments with the objective of serving as a comprehensive resource for information about the institution.
Institutional Research at Pratt
• The Office of Institutional Research (IR) at Pratt Institute is part of the President's Office. IR mission is to support data driven decision making in evaluation and planning efforts of the Institute's senior administration by initiating and conducting studies on Pratt's policies, academic programs, and environment.
IR office :
• Gathers information from internal and external sources (e.g., students, parents, faculty, staff, other institutions, and external agencies) for assessment and strategic planning.
• Provides information and projections needed for planning.
• Coordinates Pratt's response to reports required by the federal government, including the IPEDS report, NYSED, NASAD, retention and graduation rate studies, etc.
IR Office (continued):
• Provides information required for certain institutional affiliations, such as accreditation reports, AICAD, and any special research projects in which Pratt Institute chooses to participate.
• Responds to external information requests and surveys that are determined to be of value to Pratt Institute.
Assignment
• You have decided that a new program should be open or an ineffective one closed. What information will you request (and from who) to make an educated decision?
Institutional Research• The data resources usually comprise
information derived from surveys, student records and other internal record systems, sectoral and national databases and reports and published research.
• The actual assessments, analyses and tested hypotheses cover issues requiring ongoing monitoring as well as the exploration of emerging issues to inform an institution’s decision-making with regard to its own development.
IR Support of Teaching and Development (examples)
• Grade ranges applied in particular subjects over time and correlation with changing characteristics in student cohorts with regard to prior achievement.
• The impact of separate components (e.g. modules) on overall award classifications over time.
• The effect of the size of continuous assessment components on overall grades awarded.
IR Support of Teaching and Development (examples)
• The entry standard below which students have a substantially increased risk of failure
• The importance of mathematical ability in overall performance in Science and Engineering
• Application, acceptance, registration and withdrawal figures for programs reflecting demand, perception and experience.
IR Support of Teaching and Development
Example of a faculty question: Failure rates have risen dramatically
in one of my courses, but I have not changed my methods and I can’t see why this has happened.
Possible IR-based explanations:• Changes in entry requirements • Changes in actual pre-entry
educational achevement of the cohort.
IR Support of Teaching and Development
• Achievement in core pre-entry subjects such as English or Mathematics
• Changes in class size• Changes in origins of class (are all students
in the class native English speakers?) • Gender, Age, Educational and socioeconomic
characteristics, and attendance type profiles• Range of grades used over time in assessing
the course
IR Support of Teaching and Development
Example of a Dean/Department Chair Question:
Student retention in my program is poor, I understand some of the reasons why but I want to address the problem and need a comprehensive picture of what is happening.
Possible IR-based actions:Analyze: • Student profile now, how it has changed
and how it is likely to change in the future • Particular program elements are
contributing most consistently to non-completion
Analyze:
•The students’ perception of the program and overall college experience
•Whether student expectations of the program were realistic prior to entry
IR Support of Teaching and Development
IR Support of Teaching and Development
Analyze:•Whether entry requirements need to be recalibrated based on changes in standards or curricula outside the Institution •Whether a change in program content and providing extra support in problem areas, would help students to progress.
Case Study: Attitudes, experiences and
characteristics influencing student degree completion
• Focus on Freshmen• The project uses information from student
database and information derived from a series of three student surveys.
• The surveys track changing attitudes as well as academic progress through the first year.
• The study also eliminates factors that do not actually have any significant effect on student achievement
Study Goals
• Explore a wide range of aspects of the experience of undergraduate students with the specific purpose of identifying factors that may influence program completion.
• Identify the factors and relationships determining the qualitative nature of the student experience.
• Explore the relationship between pre-entry expectations and reality of the university experience.
• Identify factors affecting student retention, with a view to focusing efforts and resources on the most potent influencing factors.
First Survey: Point of Admission
• Demographics • Self evaluation of personal characteristics;
including persistence, mathematical and writing ability, ambition, academic ability and self-confidence,
• Factors affecting the decision to study at University,
• Level of prior understanding of the program,
• Anticipated time spent on specified work, study and social activities,
• Difficulties anticipated,
First Survey: Point of Admission
• Perceived locus of responsibility for learning and the role of the lecturer,
• Priorities while at University, academic ambitions and career goals,
• Family educational background, • Financial concerns, • Perception of the experience of studying
at higher education level in practical terms, and
• The anticipated best and worst elements of the experience of study at University.
Second Survey – Mid-year
Compares student responses with the first survey
• Self evaluation of characteristics, • Level of prior understanding of the
program, • Actual time spent on specific activities, • Difficulties encountered, • Perceived locus of responsibility for
learning and the role of the lecturer, • Priorities while at University, academic
ambitions and career goals,
Second Survey – Mid-year
• Financial concerns, • The best and worst elements of the
experience thus far,• Self-identified changes in perception of
study at higher education level having spent one semester in the University,
• Support services accessed, and • Integration into campus life/sense of
belonging.
Third Survey – End-of-Year
• Academic history including high school results and SAT (ACT) scores, and level of preference for the institution where the participants were accepted,
• Exam results achieved through the year, including continuous assessment grades,
• End-of year results, • Other official items of record including
withdrawal and reasons for withdrawal, changes in optional program elements and transfer, and
• Completion rates at the institutional and program level.
Other Cases/Studies
• Factors affecting student retention and graduation
• Barrier Courses• Placement tests and their impact on
subsequent student course performance
• SAT scores as predictors of student persistence
STUDENT RECRUITMENT
The Educational Pipeline• Understanding Student Choice:
~ Marketing studies that determine what factors influence students to apply, become admitted, and enroll at the institution.~ Identifying databases and software analyses tools that facilitate institution’s ability to locate, recruit and attract students in the pipeline.
STUDENT RECRUITMENT
~ Generate a trend analysis that compares characteristics of this year’s applicants with applicants from previous years at the same point in time.~ Compare admitted studentswho ultimately chose to enroll with those who did not.~ Provide institutional data to college ranking services.~ Provide data about student and parent perception of the institutional image as compared with peers.
STUDENT RECRUITMENT• Yield rates:
~ Admit yield rates~ Enrollment yield rates
• Enrollment projections:1. What are the needs of institution?2. What are the dimensions of the
analysis?3. What is the time horizon?4. What methodology should be used?5. How should qualitative and quantitative
input be balanced?
STUDENT RECRUITMENT
• Financial Aid (FA)1. What is the college’s FA policy? Who
determines the policy? How well integrated are the admissions and FA policies?
2. What types of aid are available? How do students qualify?
3. How is FA packaged? How and when are students offered aid? How is it disbursed?
4. How are scholarships, loans and student employment balanced?
5. How are recruitment and retention functions of aid balanced?
STUDENT RECRUITMENT
6. What are statistics reported by the FA office? (examples)~ How many students receive aid? New students? Continuing students?~ How many receive scholarships? Loans? Work-study awards?~ How many receive need-based aid? How many show unmet need?~ How much FA is disbursed? What is the net tuition revenue?~ What is the price of attendance?
STUDENT RECRUITMENT
~ What is the level of student indebtedness?~ How those statistics vary by student demographics and other characteristics?~ What are the trends over time?
National Concerns:• The interplay between FA, tuition and
college price overall.• The impact of federal and state policies on
FA.• Use of “discounting” for effective recruiting.• The rapid escalation of student loans and
indebtedness.
STUDENT FLOW• Academic Preparation• Selecting Students• Student Placement• Other Academic Assets• The Curriculum• Types of Studies• Campus Climate• Academic and Student Support
Programs• Formative (Process) Evaluation• Summative (Outcome) Evaluation
STUDENT FLOW• Graduation and Retention Rates1. Increasing the institution’s retention and
graduation rates2. Increasing transfer rates (in) and
baccalaureate degree completion of associate degree students
3. Reducing time to graduation4. Closing the gap between underrepresented
groups and other students5. Increasing academic preparation – the link
between recruitment & retention6. Implementing & evaluating efficient &
effective retention programs.
STUDENT FLOW
• Descriptive Data• Multivariate Analyses• Qualitative Methods1. Survey Research2. Interviews3. Focus Groups• Peer Data
Student Flow• Beyond Graduation:1.The overall quality and training of an
institution’s graduates/students.2.The preparation of graduates in specific
areas: writing skills, technical skills, quantitative resoning, oral communication, leadership & teamwork.
3.The accessibility of the campus, and its students, to the employer for interviewing.
4.Trends in past hiring and expectations for the future.
Assessment
• Operational Terms• Drivers of assessment• Assessment of institutional effectiveness• Assessment of student learning
outcomes• Blending assessments• Benefits and cautions• Questions and concerns
Institutional Research and Assessment
Assessment is the process of asking and answering questions that seek to align our stated intentions with documentable realities. As such, in higher education, it deals with courses, programs, policies, procedures, and operations.
Evaluation: An Operational Definition
• Evaluation focuses on individual performance in the sense of job completion and quality, typically resulting in merit raises, plans for future improvement, or—in less satisfying cases—probation and possibly firing.
Assessment vs. Evaluation
• Assessment focuses on the work to be done, the outcomes, and the impact on others—not on the individuals doing the work.
• Evaluation focuses on the work of the individuals—their contributions, effectiveness, creativity, responsibility, engagement, or whatever factors the organization deems most desirable.
Assessment of Institutional Effectiveness vs. Student Learning
• Institutional effectiveness = the results of operational processes, policies, duties and sites—and their success in working together—to support the management of the academy
• Student learning = the results of curricular and co-curricular experiences designed to provide students with knowledge and skills
What or who is driving assessment?
• Accreditors… charged with determining the
reputable from non-reputable institutions and programs
charged with checking on practices that affect the viability and sustainability of the institution and its offerings
represent disciplinary and institutional interests
Assessment drivers (cont’d.)
• The public: “Ivory Tower,” liberal bias, ratings/rankings
• Legislators: responsive to citizens’ concerns about quality, costs, biases….or?
• Prospective faculty: Quality and meaningful contributions to students’ lives
• Prospective parents: real learning and preparation for careers
• Prospective students: How will I measure up? And what kind of job can I get when I graduate?
• Funding agencies/foundations: evidence of commitment to learning and knowledge and evidence of [prior] success
Higher Education Realities
• Competitive nature of higher education– National rankings– Institutional research and data– Marketing– Niche markets
• Tuition Costs• Consumer attitudes of students:
learning outcomes and institutional effectiveness
Matters of Institutional Quality
• Can we justify costs/prices of attendance?• Can we verify the quality of our educational
offerings in measurable terms?• Can we verify the effectiveness of
operational contributors to a sustainable educational experience?
• Can we use data and other findings to improve the quality of our educational and operational offerings?
• Can we use those findings to align resources (financial, staff, curricular, co-curricular) to enhance desired outcomes?
Sites of Institutional Effectiveness
• Processes [existence and transparency]– Enrollment: Admissions, financial aid, registration– Curricular: Advising, progress toward degree
completion– Budgeting: operations/salaries; capital; bond
ratings and ratios; endowment management; benefits; etc.
– Planning: strategic planning, compact planning, curricular planning, etc.
– Judicial: education/training, communication, sanctions, etc.
– Residence Life: housing selection, training for RAs, conflict resolution/mediation,
Sites of Institutional Effectiveness
• Units/Offices of operations– Advancement– Admissions, Bursar, Registrar– Center for Advising, Academic Support, etc.– Campus Safety– Maintenance– IT– Institutional Research– Athletics– Student Engagement
The Assessment Cycle: Key Questions for Institutional
Effectiveness
What services, programs, or benefits should our offices provide?
For what purposes or with what intended results?
What evidence do we have that they provide these outcomes?
How can we use information to improve or celebrate successes?
Do the improvements we make work?
What are we looking for? EXAMPLES of evidence: Our admission of students for whom our
institution is the first choice has risen 20%. 90% of students report satisfaction with
the housing selection process. Four faculty and two student committees
participated in the last strategic planning planning cycle.
Overall, faculty, staff, and students report feeling safe on campus, following the new Campus Safety Improvement initiatives.
Where do we seek improvement [and what evidence will help us]?• We need to raise the number of
students who choose our institution as their first choice to 50% by 2017.
• All faculty committees will be invited to participate in the next planning cycle.
• Students (95%) will report feeling safe on campus and its neighborhood.
• 50 percent of the credit-hours will be taught by the full-time faculty.
What qualities point to institutional effectiveness?
• A well-articulated set of processes for critical functions
• A clear line of responsibility and accountability for critical functions
• An alignment of the importance of the function and sufficient resources (staff, budget, training, etc.) to support the function
• Evidence of institution-wide knowledge of those critical functions, processes, and lines of responsibility
What kinds of evidence points to institutional effectiveness?
• Well-managed budgets• Accreditation and governmental compliance• Clearly defined and supported shared
governance (board, president, administration, faculty, staff, and students)
• Communication pathways and strategies [transparency]
• Consensus on mission, strategic plan, goals, priorities, etc.
• Student (and other constituencies’) satisfaction
How do we measure institutional effectiveness?
• Tangible evidence: Audited budget statements, handbooks, enrollment data, institutional data
• Records/reports of activities and/or compliance
• Self-studies pointing to documented evidence• Surveys of satisfaction, usage, attitudes,
confidence, etc.• Disciplinary accreditation reports
The Assessment Cycle: Key Questions for Student
Learning
What should our students know or be able to do by the time they graduate?
What evidence do we have that they know and can do these things?
How can we use information to improve or celebrate successes?
Do the improvements we make work?
The Iterative Assessment Cycle for
Institutional Effectiveness
Mission/Purposes
Objectives/Goals
Outcomes
Implement Methods to
Gather Evidence
Gather Evidence
Interpret Evidence
Make decisions to improve programs, services, or benefits; contribute to institutional experience; inform
institutional decision-making, planning,
budgeting, policy, public accountability
Student Learning Assessment: What should students know or be able to demonstrate by the time they graduate?
• Civic engagement • Diversity appreciation• Communication skills• Professional
responsibility• Ethics• Critical thinking• Collaborative learning• Leadership• Mathematical or
Quantitative competence
• Technological competence• Scientific competence• Research skills• Cultural competence• Interdisciplinary
competence• Civic responsibility• Global competence• Economic/financial
competence• Social justice
What might our sources of evidence be?
• Essays/Theses• Portfolios (faculty or external readers
evaluated)• Quizzes• Oral presentations• Homework assignments• Lab experiments• Tests• Journal entries• Projects• Demonstrations
What are we looking for?
• Evidence of students’ skill level (basic competency to mastery)– based on faculty-articulated standards
of quality and judgments– applied to all students’ work evenly– indicative of aggregate evaluations of
performance or knowledge– informative for course or program
improvements
Can we use the same processes and strategies to
assess both arenas?• Measuring learning versus effectiveness, efficiency, and/or satisfaction
- BEYOND ANECDOTAL INTO EVIDENCE
• Methods of testing, projects, demonstrations versus surveys, records, reports
- QUALIFY OR QUANTIFY THE OUTCOMES
• Use of results (revisions versus training)- MODIFY WHAT YOU DO TO AFFECT
OUTCOMES
What is similar?• A commitment to doing the very best
job possible under whatever conditions exist
• A commitment to recognizing ways that altering those conditions can affect the outcomes
• A commitment to recognizing that altering the outcomes can affect the conditions
Ultimately….
We hold ourselves and our colleagues accountable for articulating the intentions of our work and then measuring the realities, resulting in designing and implementing strategies for improvement over time.
• How are we doing?• How can we do better?
Common IR • The Office of Institutional Research
provides a wide variety of services: Fact bookStudent Retention and Graduation ReportsFederal ReportingNational and professional surveysIn-house surveys, etc.
Recommended