Upload
sadah
View
21
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Step into the Spotlight: A New Approach to Qualitative Data Collection. Valarie (Chair), Rimi, Kia, Janet University of Nevada, Las Vegas Academic Advising Council Student Group Commission. UNLV. 4-year Public Institution Urban Commuter Campus 28,000 Students Retention/Graduation Rates - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Step into the Spotlight: A New Approach to Qualitative Data
Collection
Step into the Spotlight: A New Approach to Qualitative Data
Collection
Valarie (Chair), Rimi, Kia, JanetUniversity of Nevada, Las Vegas
Academic Advising CouncilStudent Group Commission
Valarie (Chair), Rimi, Kia, JanetUniversity of Nevada, Las Vegas
Academic Advising CouncilStudent Group Commission
UNLVUNLV
• 4-year Public Institution• Urban Commuter Campus• 28,000 Students• Retention/Graduation Rates• Strip in Backyard
• 4-year Public Institution• Urban Commuter Campus• 28,000 Students• Retention/Graduation Rates• Strip in Backyard
UNLV Academic AdvisingUNLV Academic Advising• 11 Colleges across campus
• Executive Director Advising– Provost Office
• Academic Advising Council– Commissions (working groups)– Examples:
• Assessment• Technology• Student Group
– Mission
• 11 Colleges across campus
• Executive Director Advising– Provost Office
• Academic Advising Council– Commissions (working groups)– Examples:
• Assessment• Technology• Student Group
– Mission
AssessmentsAssessments
• Reasons to do assessment• UNLV Assessments
– Graduation exit survey–Assessment Commission
•Quantitative Survey–Advising center surveys
• Reasons to do assessment• UNLV Assessments
– Graduation exit survey–Assessment Commission
•Quantitative Survey–Advising center surveys
Student Group Commission
Student Group Commission
• The Importance of Qualitative Research– Manning, K. (1992). A Rationale for Using Qualitative
Research in Student Affairs. Journal of College Student Development, 33, 132-136.
• The Importance of Qualitative Research– Manning, K. (1992). A Rationale for Using Qualitative
Research in Student Affairs. Journal of College Student Development, 33, 132-136.Quantitative:
WhatQualitative: Why
Prefer to see same advisor
Want a relationship - aids in accuracy and consistency of information
Student Group Commission
Student Group Commission
• Qualitative Research– Focus Groups
• SAAB– Confessionals
• Qualitative Research– Focus Groups
• SAAB– Confessionals
CLIPCLIP
First Step: PlanningFirst Step: Planning
• What– Collecting qualitative data from students
• Where– Location: Student Union
• When– Timing: First month of semester, Student
Involvement Fair
• How:– IRB Training– Advertising– Marketing
• What– Collecting qualitative data from students
• Where– Location: Student Union
• When– Timing: First month of semester, Student
Involvement Fair
• How:– IRB Training– Advertising– Marketing
Second Step: ProcessSecond Step: Process
• IRB Proposal– Informed Consent
• Equipment– Video Camera
• Reserving Rooms
• IRB Proposal– Informed Consent
• Equipment– Video Camera
• Reserving Rooms
Third Step: ProductionThird Step: Production
• Shirts• Marketing materials
– Burritos– TV Screens
• Confessional Taping – Sign informed consent
• Information can be shared
• Shirts• Marketing materials
– Burritos– TV Screens
• Confessional Taping – Sign informed consent
• Information can be shared
Fourth Step: AnalysisFourth Step: Analysis
• Review Videos– Approximately one month– Transcribing
• Coding data– Themes
• Review Videos– Approximately one month– Transcribing
• Coding data– Themes
Fifth Step: ResultsFifth Step: Results
•Sample Size: 114•Topics of Discussion:
–Type of Appointment = 26.3%–Class Selection = 54.4%–Career Planning = 9.6%–Advisor-Student Relationship =
37.7%•Astin’s Theory of Involvement
•Sample Size: 114•Topics of Discussion:
–Type of Appointment = 26.3%–Class Selection = 54.4%–Career Planning = 9.6%–Advisor-Student Relationship =
37.7%•Astin’s Theory of Involvement
The Next StepThe Next Step
•Assessment for Campus– Who We Shared it With
• Executive Director• Directors of Each Advising Center• Advising Council
• Review Journal • Campus Buzz
– Collaboration
•Assessment for Campus– Who We Shared it With
• Executive Director• Directors of Each Advising Center• Advising Council
• Review Journal • Campus Buzz
– Collaboration
ConclusionConclusion• Timeline: June - January (8 months)• Advising
– Pros/Cons•Advising Syllabus
• You can do this too!– Budget, use campus resources
• Compliment the Quantitative Survey– Work with the Assessment Commission– Themes already established
• Timeline: June - January (8 months)• Advising
– Pros/Cons•Advising Syllabus
• You can do this too!– Budget, use campus resources
• Compliment the Quantitative Survey– Work with the Assessment Commission– Themes already established
ReferencesReferences
• Astin, A.W. (1977). What matters in college: Four critical years. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Astin, A.W. (1993). What matters in college:Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Manning, K. (1992). A Rationale for Using Qualitative Research in Student Affairs. Journal of College Student Development, 33, 132-136.
• Tinto,V. (1987) Leaving College (Chicago,University of Chicago Press).
• Astin, A.W. (1977). What matters in college: Four critical years. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Astin, A.W. (1993). What matters in college:Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Manning, K. (1992). A Rationale for Using Qualitative Research in Student Affairs. Journal of College Student Development, 33, 132-136.
• Tinto,V. (1987) Leaving College (Chicago,University of Chicago Press).
QuestionsQuestions