A

Report

from the

Student Success Task Force

2015

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................. 1

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................ 3

Review 2010 Student Success Model ..................................................................................................................................... 4

EAB Materials and Webinar .................................................................................................................................................... 5

Student Success Collaborative ................................................................................................................................................ 6

First-Year Experience .............................................................................................................................................................. 7

Student Success in Years 2 and 3 ............................................................................................................................................ 8

Senior Year and Student Engagement .................................................................................................................................... 9

Retention Risk Model ............................................................................................................................................................ 10

Proxy for Grit ......................................................................................................................................................................... 11

Probation, Suspension and Mentoring ................................................................................................................................. 12

Change of Major Flow ........................................................................................................................................................... 13

Proposed New Model and Recommendations ..................................................................................................................... 14

Appendix A: Agendas of Task Force Meetings ................................................................................................................. 16

Appendix B: Student Success Model Initiatives: Year 1 – Priorities for Implementation/Change .................................. 17

Appendix C: Student Success: Years 2 – 3 | ALIGNMENT .............................................................................................. 22

Appendix D: Proxy for Grit ............................................................................................................................................... 23

Appendix E: Major Flow ................................................................................................................................................... 25

1

Executive Summary

During Fall Semester 2014, a task force was named to review the 2010 Student Success Model and using best practice

research, make recommendations to update the model for the next five years. A task force comprised of 22

representatives from Student and Academic Affairs was convened and co-chaired by Vice President for Student Affairs

Marysz Rames and Provost Laurie Nichols. The task force began its work in November 2014 and concluded in May 2015.

This report represents the activities and recommendations of the task force.

In reviewing the current model, the task force assessed the extent to which each model component/program had been

implemented and the extent to which the model and its component programs yielded positive outcomes. In general, the

task force felt the inaugural model focused most heavily on the first-year experience and achieved thorough

implementation in that area. Other aspects of the model, such as initiatives during the sophomore or senior year, had

partial success in implementation. These areas were not as thoroughly implemented, nor had the outcomes been as

strong. The task force also reviewed other data, such as National Study of Student Engagement (NSSE) findings and

University retention rates.

Education Advisory Board (EAB) served as the primary resource for current research and best practices around student

success. The EAB’s monograph (Hardwiring Student Success), strategy map (State of the Union on Student Success and

Retention), and webinar (Playbook for Student Success) were primary resources that guided the task force’s work. SDSU

has joined the Student Success Collaborative (SSC) to provide timely data to improve advising and retention.

The first-year experience sub-group made several recommendations regarding programs that were underway, but not

fully institutionalized. These included early alert, exploratory studies, living-learning communities, peer mentoring and

the readmit success program. They also recommended continued use of the College Student Inventory (CSI) as a

predictive tool, and to allow departments to opt-in to block-scheduled learning communities, with the understanding

that those who opt in will truly develop learning communities in their blocked courses.

The sophomore & junior year experience sub-group recommended strengthening this year via four recommendations:

1) high impact curricula and engagement during 200 level coursework; 2) enhanced financial aid assistance and

education to sophomores; 3) intense advising outreach to undeclared sophomores using the Student Success

Collaborative (SSC) as a tool; and 4) a summer letter campaign coupled with a social media event to welcome

sophomores back to campus.

A sub-group reviewed pre-enrollment, the senior year, and post-graduation. Recommendations included increasing

academic contact and providing more information to admitted students prior to enrollment, improve change of major

process, develop a more focused effort with transfer students, continue to expand student engagement opportunities

during the senior year including a senior capstone experience, strengthen career development, and better develop

launching activities such as exit interviews, connections with Alumni Association, and placement surveys.

A sub-group used 10 years of SDSU student data to develop a risk model around two largely independent predictions of

first year students’ probability of being retained: academic factors (ACT and high school GPA) and non-academic factors

(CSI data such as desire to transfer and educational stress, and financial estimated family contribution). Students were

placed in one of four sub-groups to which tailored advising strategies may be applied. These differential advising

strategies will allow for targeted advising interventions and more efficient use of advisor time and resources.

2

EAB suggested campuses develop a “proxy for grit,” whereby certain activities serve as a proxy for indicators of

retention (or grit). The team that analyzed this data suggested a proxy for grit at SDSU to include: CSI data, “sign in”

data at the Wintrode Student Success Center, Math Help Center, Wellness Center, and ARAMARK dining; D2L sign in

data; and class attendance for classes located in large lecture classrooms. This data can be available early in the

semester and used for intervention purposes.

Those students most academically at risk were studied with a goal to provide stronger intervention as soon as possible.

From this work, a task force sub-group recommended that students who go on probation be required to enroll in UC 143

with an additional 1-credit lab component. Students who are suspended and readmitted will be required to complete a

re-entry student success program including enrollment in GS 011 paired with peer mentoring. The group also suggested

collecting campus-wide information on peer mentoring so the University has a complete inventory.

The task force concluded its work by developing a refreshed model for student success. The model will be web-based

with a “click and learn” feature for students. The strategy map contains the following four stages plus a “Throughout

the SDSU Experience” component:

Connection Pre-enrollment What will you do to be prepared for college?

Acclimation Year One How can you get off to a strong start at SDSU?

Alignment Years Two and Three How will you make the most of your college experience?

Transition Year Four What will you do to be prepared for your next step?

Throughout the SDSU Experience How can you ensure your overall success as a student?

Beyond refreshing the Student Success Model and strategy map, four major recommendations emerged:

Utilize a risk (data) analysis for the entering freshmen class to assess propensity for success and/or level of risk

for retention. Based on this data, differentiated advising will be developed to address unique needs.

Develop a proxy for grit whereby students swipe their ID card at strategic locations to determine those students

who are engaged, attending class, and generally accessing university resources. Based on this, develop an

intervention for minimally-engaged students. This data is most powerful early in the semester.

Refine the change-of-major flow analysis and then develop proactive strategies to facilitate student movement

from one major to another; In addition, improve the change of major process.

Implement course requirements for students who are on probation or re-entry after suspension; strengthen

peer mentoring.

The full report follows for more detailed information on each of these sub-group reports and recommendations. The co-chairs would like to thank the task force for its honest discussion of successes and shortcomings over the past five years. We are especially appreciative of the task force’s innovative approach to refreshing the Student Success Model and recommending other data-driven practices that can identify students, customize our approaches to support them, and facilitate their success in the next five years.

3

Introduction

In Fall 2009, a task force was developed to explore student success at SDSU. Beyond using the HLC self-study to understand the student experience at SDSU, the task force was charged with studying student success programs across the country, particularly those programs for which assessment data documented enhanced student engagement, improved quality of education, and stronger retention and graduation rates. The task force was co-chaired by Provost Laurie Nichols and Vice President for Student Affairs Marysz Rames. The 18-member task force included equal representation of Student Affairs administrators and staff, and Academic Affairs administrators, faculty and staff. The task force worked throughout the academic year with a final report presented in the Spring 2010. The first comprehensive student success plan for SDSU began implementation in Fall 2010. Nearly all components of the model have been implemented, although the extent of implementation has varied with some components experiencing greater success than others. Because this first model is approaching five years of use and because some aspects of student success have changed, a follow-up task force was needed to evaluate the current model and develop a refreshed model for the next five years.

As before, Vice President Marysz Rames and Provost Laurie Nichols served as co-chairs of the task force and identified a collaborative task force comprised of representation from Academic and Student Affairs:

Representing Student Affairs Representing Academic Affairs

Aaron Aure, Director of Enrollment Management Carla Anderson, Coordinator for Student Services, College of Education & Human Sciences

CD Douglas, Director, Multicultural Center David Cartrette, Associate Professor and Assistant Department Head, Chemistry

Carolyn Halgerson, Director, Financial Aid Kurt Cogswell, Department Head, Math and Statistics

Shawn Helmbolt, Assistant Director, Admissions Keith Corbett, Dean, University College

Sam Jennings, Dean of Students Dan Hansen, Associate Dean for Student Services, College of Pharmacy

Adam Karnopp, Director of Orientation Don Marshall, Associate Dean and Director of Academic Programs, College of Agriculture and Biological Sciences

Shari Landmark, Ass’t Director, Wellness Center Vickie Mix, Associate Professor, Briggs Library

Toby Uecker, Ass’t Director, Living/Learning Initiatives Tim Nichols, Dean, Fishback Honors College

Nick Wendell, Director of Student Engagement Jody Owen, Director of the First Year Advising Center and University Advising

Rhoda Smith, Director of South Dakota Jump Start Todd Stricherz, Director of Nursing Student Services

Sherri Newcomb* Tom Brandenburger, Associate Professor, Math & Statistics *Newcomb is Special Assistant to the President, directing the Office of Planning, Decision Support and Assessment

The task force was charged with “evaluating the impact that the current Student Success Model has had on improving

student retention, sophomore attrition, and graduation rates, and to review the most recent research on student success

and current best practices to update the model for fall 2015 implementation”.

A total of 7 meetings occurred every month from November through May. Appendix A provides the agenda for each

meeting. In addition, five sub-groups were formed to more fully develop components of the refreshed plan. Each group

had an identified convener and met outside of the normally scheduled task force meetings. These sub-groups included:

First Year Experience • Risk model

Sophomore and Junior Year Experience • Proxy for grit

Senior Year Experience and other aspects of the model

4

Review 2010 Student Success Model

A comprehensive, co-curricular Student Success Model was launched Fall 2010. The model was based on best practices

and drew heavily from the work of George Kuh and John Gardner in particular. The full model can be found at

http://www.sdstate.edu/academic/student/upload/Student-Success-Model.pdf Of significance was the development

of a four-stage student success strategy map, starting with pre-admission and continuing through graduation. This map

became the guiding framework for program development.

Student Success Products

Beyond the strategy map, many other student success products were developed from 2010-2015. A few of these

included a Directory of Student Success Model Programs, an Advising Resource and Referral document, a Roadmap to

Success for students, and a Senior Handbook.

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)

SDSU has administered the NSSE to freshmen and seniors on an even-year basis since 2002, with 2014 being the most

recent administration. The NSSE assesses the student experience in five categories: academic challenge; active and

collaborative learning; student-faculty interaction; enriching educational experience; and supportive campus

environment. In the early model, 2008 NSSE data was used to form a baseline, and goals for the 2012 NSSE were

established against this baseline. The executive summaries for 2008-2014 are linked on the new model under the

assessment section.

Launched Fall 2010

5

EAB Materials and Webinar

Early in its work, the task force consulted a recent EAB monograph Hardwiring Student Success: Building Disciplines for Retention and Timely Graduation, which included the fold-out reference, State of the Union on Student Engagement and Retention. In addition, members participated in the EAB Webinar, Playbook for Student Success: Insights and Imperatives for the Next Phase of Completion Investment.

EAB’s research points to the fact that, while there has been a significant investment (12 percent) in student success over the last decade across the nation, root causes of attrition remain elusive. The materials point to the ‘high stakes’ nature of this work, citing the economies of losing students, the competitive nature of higher education, performance-based funding, and expectations for transparency and accountability, through a number of highly visible rating mechanisms.

EAB discusses an evolution in the work around student success and a number of key shifts in optimal approaches:

Movement from disproportionate investment in high risk students, to greater emphasis on the ‘murky middle’ – often the majority of an institution’s students, whose grade point averages are between 2.0 and 3.0.

Change from sole focus on first year experience to greater emphasis on persistence and completion.

Movement from solely academic-based interventions to a more holistic approach that includes broader strategies and a greater mix of collaborating units.

Each of these shifts suggests implications for campus efforts around data, staffing, policies, and technologies. Among the key insights from this work was the acknowledgement that most students leave SDSU in good academic status. Therefore, non-academic reasons for poor performance must be better understood; the ‘high flyers’ (some of whom transfer), and those who are performing well academically, but who indicate they ‘do not fit,’ must be more deeply engaged in the University community.

One EAB approach to better understanding student success centered on how the changing of major works to support or impede student success. The task force did initial study of ‘donor majors, static majors, acceptor majors, flow majors, and pivot majors’ at SDSU and discussed the advising work and structures that might improve this process.

EAB highlighted ‘grit’ as a key factor in student success. Some institutions have developed a ‘proxy for grit’ comprised of academic and non-academic factors which help them more effectively target advising and support services. At Eastern Connecticut University, advising is structured into four domains of increasing intensity, based on ‘proxy for grit’. For example, students who were already very likely to succeed received ‘monitoring’ advising, while students who were more at risk had a more intensive advising approach. These quadrants of advising allowed the institution to more effectively allocate scarce advising resources. Non-academic factors that might be included in the proxy for grit include attendance at New Student Orientation, swipe card data from the library, participation in campus events, etc.

As a summary, EAB’s materials identify five imperatives for building for the next phase in degree completion. These ideas significantly informed the direction of the task force. EAB’s imperatives were:

1. Build (and continuously update) a risk model incorporating academic and non-academic factors; 2. Prioritize frequency and focus of advising based on predicted student risk profile; 3. Assign advisor case-loads based on major-switching patterns to allow for personalization and continuity; 4. Craft registration and withdrawal policies to reward long-term commitment and disincentivize plan deviation; 5. Automate transactional processes to promote self-service and reserve staff for higher value activities.

Finally, the flow chart, State of the Union on Student Engagement and Retention, provided a holistic visual depiction of the national landscape on student success, shown from pre-admission through degree completion. This served as inspiration for the format and look for the next generation Student Success Model at SDSU.

6

Student Success Collaborative

SDSU is a member of the EAB’s Student Success Collaborative (SSC) which combines technology, consulting and best practices research to help the University use data to improve retention and graduation rates. At the core of SSC is a predictive model built on SDSU’s historical data to generate actionable risk assessments for all students. To maximize impact on students through the actions outlined in SDSU’s Student Success Model, college, departments, and advisors have access to the data analytics in the SSC. These data can help users develop targeted advising campaigns to provide more focused, proactive outreach to populations of students in need of a specific intervention or action, including:

Immediate Performance Concerns: Students in this category are currently failing courses, missing milestones, or struggling to remain academically eligible. They are at-risk in the most traditional sense and unlikely to persist without immediate support. The SSC platform can be used to very quickly identify this group of students. The platform also provides a broad set of communication features to transform such insights into action and outcomes.

Potential Future Performance Concerns: Students in this category may appear to be performing adequately, but SSC data suggest that they are likely to struggle or encounter roadblocks in future terms. The predictive analytics capabilities of the SSC platform helps identify potential roadblocks as students move through the major.

Program Choice Concerns: These students are enrolled in a major that may be a poor fit for them based on their academic performance, or remain undeclared past the recommended credit threshold. SSC can be used to identify these students. A proactive advising conversation could help put these students on a more appropriate program and career trajectory.

Progress Concerns: Students in this group may be in good academic standing, but are making slower than recommended progress to graduation, potentially adding cost or reducing the likelihood of completing their degree. This group includes students how have stopped out, or whose credit accumulation has slowed. A targeted campaign focused on students in this population can help focus efforts to encourage full-time status, adding summer term courses and/or completing the associates degree.

Student Experience Concerns: Students in this population are in good academic standing, but may benefit from an encouraging message or engagement opportunity to deepen and broaden their learning, strengthen their relationship with the institution and get more out of their college experience. Internships, field experiences, study abroad, undergraduate research, student government and organizations are some of a few possible enrichment activities.

7

First-Year Experience

The work group began by assessing the state of First-Year Initiatives from the original Student Success Model. Initiatives

were categorized as Institutionalized, Institutionalized with Recommendation (meaning the initiative was largely in

place, but small adjustments should be made), or Partially Institutionalized (meaning significant attention should be

given to fully implement the initiative). With further detail provided in Appendix B, the categorizations were as follows:

Institutionalized Institutionalized w/Recommendation Partially Institutionalized

Common Read Early Alert System First Year Seminar*

Consistent Residence Hall Programs Exploratory Studies Learning Communities

First Year Advising Center Living Learning Communities

Meet State Peer Mentoring Program

TRiO Student Support Services Readmit Success Program

Honors College

Wintrode Tutoring Program

Supplemental Instruction

*Upon further consultation the group determined that the current First Year Seminar approach fits SDSU’s institutional structure.

The group determined that initiatives categorized as “Institutionalized” should continue as status quo within the Model.

Beyond those programs, the work group made the following recommendations:

Exploratory Studies – Develop a formal implementation team with representatives from relevant offices.

Learning Communities – Continue with a program that allows interested Departments to opt into Learning

Communities; focus also on developing true Learning Communities that go beyond simple shared schedules (i.e.,

incorporate cross-course topics, study sessions, etc.). Rebrand LCs as “First Year Interest Groups.”

Living Learning Communities (LLCs) – Seek connections between LLCs and First Year Interest Groups, pursuing a

pilot program with a First Year Interest Group living in shared community as an LLC.

Peer Mentoring – Develop a clearinghouse for information and resource (further discussed on page 12).

Readmit Success Program – Expand to include BOTH readmits and probationary students; change name to

Program for Academic Recovery (further discussed on page 12).

College Student Inventory – Continue administering to all first-year students for use in Risk Model (see later

section); complete during New Student Orientation instead of move-in weekend. Develop implementation team.

Celebrating Completion Milestones [NEW] – Incorporate deliberate recognition/celebration of transition from

FY Advising Center to Departmental advisors, expanding on existing transition events. SSC can be used to

quickly and easily identify students who are meeting this milestone

Mid-Semester Success Course [NEW] – Offer several courses focused on student success that begin at midterm.

Retention/Student Success Data Manager [NEW] – Identify a point person for collecting and managing data

related to Student Success Model Initiatives.

These recommendations are discussed further in an Appendix B document (“Student Success Model Initiatives: Year 1 –

Priorities for Implementation/Change). These recommendations represent priorities rather than an exhaustive list of

everything that could be done. While Early Alert initiatives are not included on this list of recommendations, the Early

Alert task force approved strategic initiatives during the 2014-15 academic year that are in progress.

8

Student Success in Years 2 and 3

The group reviewed the Student Success Strategy Map as it pertained to alignment (persistence) activities in years 2 and 3. The review included individual knowledge and experience informed by the EAB report Hardwiring Student Success and supporting materials. The group recommended disbanding activities that had not been attempted in earnest. For example, sophomore dinners with faculty and the Common Read were eliminated for years 2 and 3. Please note that the Common Read was seen as a very strong experiential opportunity for first-year students, but it didn’t translate into the second year as thoroughly. In addition to removing a few initiatives that did not realize full development, the group recommended alternative activities to help foster student engagement and retention: 1. High Impact Curriculum and Engagement – This is the first priority identified by the work group. Actively and

intentionally engaging students in their learning and social experiences will foster stronger connections and satisfaction among students and likely increase faculty and staff satisfaction. This particular modification will require the hard work of colleagues across campus to commit to modifying instructional modalities, methodologies, and student engagement practices.

2. Adequate staffing in Financial Aid to provide outreach and programming – Students struggle with finances. This topic is reiterated in data from Noel-Levitz, SDSU’s Financial Aid Office, and a host of various news outlets on a given day. To address this, advisors need more information about financial aid, and whenever possible, students should be advised directly by financial aid counselors.

3. Advising outreach to undeclared second-year students – SDSU joined the Student Success Collaborative (SSC) nearly 2 years ago to provide more data analytics to advisors as they work with students. Students in the second year without a major should be a focus for intervention. Using the SSC, Academic Advisors should proactively reach out to second-year students who have yet to declare a major or who wish to change a major so as to engage such students in conversation about their past academic performance and predictions for success. While picking a major will not “fix” this problem, a meaningful conversation about what the student wants out of her or his experience and utilization of proper resources can be a significant decision in the student’s life. Designed as an SSC-based targeted campaign, University College is currently targeting students in the Exploratory Studies program taking classes on the main campus or at a distance who have completed 30 + credits to assist these students with declaring a major to increase their likelihood for timely degree completion.

4. Summer Letter Campaign – Conceptually, second-year students could receive a letter at home during the summer to re-welcome them to SDSU. In addition, the letter would state the student’s major and remind them of the activities waiting for them when they get back to campus. The goal would be to energize second-year students to increase their anticipation to moving back to Brookings.

5. Social media event – instead of hosting a social where students would be expected to show up at a location at a given time, the work group recommended a social media event. This would be time-bound, but would not incur the financial expense. Additionally, it could provide an opportunity for students to engage who would likely not attend a social function.

During years 2 and 3, the SSC platform can also be used to identify students who fall within the “murky middle”, those students who have grade point averages within the 2.0 to 3.0 range. These students are sometimes overlooked even though they may at times show subtle signs of risk or simply be in need of positive encouragement. Advisors or others at the department or college levels can develop a targeted campaign focused on students in this category. It is well understood that these recommendations cannot be implemented on desire alone. The work group will have to identify partners across campus to engage in the work, as well as the expense, of these initiatives. Further development and implementation of the revamped Student Success Model will guide the application of these initiatives to support students in their second and third years at SDSU. The original document can be seen in Appendix C.

9

Senior Year and Student Engagement

This sub-group began its work by reviewing the EAB’s flow chart on the State of the Union on Student Engagement and Retention. Members discussed the flow chart in relation to SDSU’s current Student Success Model, identifying areas of success and those areas that may require additional attention and programming. Subcommittee members agreed that much progress had been made with First Year Student Success programming and infrastructure. Recommendations for the revised SDSU Student Success Model are discussed below, emphasizing pre-enrollment, post-enrollment, and students in their junior and senior years. Model Recommendations: Pre-Enrollment

College and departmental outreach (e.g., welcome letter) to admitted students.

Completion of all placement testing prior to New Student Orientation (NSO).

More academic information prior to enrollment (e.g. sending degree requirements before NSO).

Letter from University after NSO explaining academic expectations. Model Recommendations: Junior and Senior Years

Increase attention to transfer student transition and success (including emphasis on accessing student success resources such as tutoring, supplemental instruction, counseling, career services, etc.).

Expand and highlight opportunities for deeper student engagement such as student organizations, study abroad, service learning, academic competitions and teams, and undergraduate research.

Collect and utilize data on student engagement via swipe/proximity cards and use this data to inform student success programming.

Strengthen student career and professional development opportunities through internships, clinical experiences, etc. Enhance communication among academic Colleges, Career Development Office, and students.

Evaluate and improve change-of-major process on campus to improve notification, communication, advising and transitions; the goal will be to minimize student difficulties and maximize transitions.

Require integrative capstone experiences for students in all majors.

Further develop the senior year handbook.

Expand senior exit interview/surveys and improve campus-wide utilization of data.

Enhance student connections to SDSU Alumni Association through communication and programming. Model Recommendations: Post-Graduation Students (alumni) should participate in a job placement survey (perhaps as part of a senior exit interview, with follow-up three, six, and 12 months after graduation. This information, along with that from the alumni satisfaction survey should be evaluated and fed back into the system to guide the further development and refinement of the University’s work around student success. Model Recommendations: Across the SDSU Experience In discussion of the different components of the student success model, Fishback Honors College, Wintrode Center, English and Math Help Centers, Peer Mentoring, Supplemental Instruction, and TRiO Student Support Services were thought to be best-conceptualized as cutting across all four years of a students’ experiences at SDSU.

10

Retention Risk Model

Model summary: The retention risk model combines two largely independent predictions of a first-time, full-time student’s probability of being retained into the sophomore year. One is based on academic factors and the other on non-academic factors. These two predictions are used to partition this group of students into four sub-groups to which tailored advising strategies may be applied. These differential advising strategies will allow for targeted advising interventions and more efficient use of advisor time and resources. More detail: Academic probability of retention is based on ACT score and high school GPA. The former is a rough measure of content knowledge, while the latter is a rough measure of ability to function in an academic environment. Non-academic probability of retention in based on CSI-derived data including “Desire to Transfer”, “Educational Stress”, and others, and non-CSI data such as Expected Family Income. Each included factor allows for a specific advisor intervention. Each student’s probability scores allow that student to be placed on a grid as pictured below. The grid can be partitioned into quadrants, each with distinct retention characteristics.

Aca

dem

ic P

rob

abili

ty

of

Ret

enti

on

High academic probability of retention Low non-academic probability of retention Non-academically targeted advisor intervention

High academic probability of retention High non-academic probability of retention Low advisor intervention

Low academic probability of retention Low non-academic probability of retention High advisor intervention

Low academic probability of retention High non-academic probability of retention Academically-targeted advisor intervention

Non-Academic Probability of Retention

Using the Model: Nearly half (46.56%) of students fall in the green quadrant, with an average retention rate of 85.33%. Advisors may save resources by devising a low-intervention strategy to employ with this group. 19.36% of the population falls into the yellow group that is academically solid but at risk for non-retention due to non-academic factors. Again, advisors may devise a specific intervention strategy for use with students in this group. The other groups allow for similar, targeted intervention strategies, providing an efficient method for increasing retention. Note that the lowest retention rate (50.8%) is with the red group – low academic & low non-academic probability of retention.

11

Proxy for Grit

Two workgroups overlapped in developing a model representing a proxy for grit. One discussed what makes a student

“gritty” in the context of what we know about them. Another one focused on data mining around proxy indicators for

grit.

Utilizing EAB summary information and what has been observed by the professionals in these groups, the following

proxies, or indicators, of grit were highlighted for further exploration:

1. Use What We’ve Got

a. The Noel-Levitz College Student Inventory (CSI) has been purchased, administered, and utilized in

recent years. The Wintrode Student Success Center and Residential Life have used the data more than

most. However, it was quickly determined that the CSI offers much richer data than has been utilized

previously. The goal is to administer the CSI during New Student Orientation and put the data to work

to guide student success initiatives earlier in the semester.

b. Data is consistently being collected by the ID card system. In several service areas students “sign in”

using their ID, which gives a very clear representation of who is using these academic support and

student engagement services:

i. Wintrode tutoring

ii. Math Help Center

iii. Chemistry Resource Room

iv. Wellness Center fitness services

v. Meal plan usage

The group recommends portable proximity readers could be used by

vi. Supplemental Instruction leaders

vii. Late Night Larson

viii. Academic Advisors

ix. Required residence hall meetings

c. The remaining data source that appears to be readily accessible is D2L. The group’s recommendation is

to utilize the information gathered here and intervene with students who have not accessed course

pages.

2. Class attendance – most students will not succeed academically if they do not attend class. The group

recommends use of proximity card readers in classrooms that have larger capacity and serve many first-year

students. The recommended spaces are:

a. Rotunda D

b. Northern Plains Biostress 024

c. Agricultural Engineering 100

The group further recommends the use of proximity readers for courses in various locations. These courses were

identified by a high rate of non-passing grades earned or high rate of student withdrawal. This is detailed in Appendix D.

12

Probation, Suspension and Mentoring

Student Success Courses

The task force quickly recognized the value of preventing students from attaining a probationary status.

For students placed on probation, the committee recommends intervention of a required course that would ensure the

student receives structured support. Thus, at the time of entering probation, students would be instructed to

successfully complete UC 143, Mastering Lifetime Learning, plus an additional 1-credit lab component.

A student on academic probation who fails to maintain a system term GPA of 2.0 or better is placed on academic

suspension for a minimum period of two academic terms (fall, spring, or summer). The student receives a letter from the

Office of Records & Registration advising he or she is placed on academic suspension due to not meeting minimum

academic progress. The student cannot enroll for two semesters, or alternatively may complete the Petition for Re-

admittance following suspension.

If the petition is approved (or at the conclusion of the suspension period and readmission), the student will be enrolled

in, and must satisfactorily complete, UC 011, Strategies for Academic Success. UC 011 is a course designed to assist

students who have been readmitted following suspension to achieve greater success. Through utilization of strategies

which strengthen skills required for academic, professional, and personal accomplishments, the course will empower

students to become proactive, responsible self-advocates for their academic careers and personal goals.

Peer Mentoring

The UC 011 course is accompanied by peer mentoring when a student is readmitted. Mentoring is a process that

involves communication and relationship building. Peer mentoring provides the readmitted student a sense of being

connected to the larger community, where they may otherwise feel lost. In most cases, it is a one-on-one mentoring

assignment, but sometimes a mentor is assigned 2-3 readmitted students who are in the same major as the

mentor. Mentors are chosen because they are academically successful and because they possess good communication,

social, and leadership skills. As a consequence, mentors serve as positive role models for the students, guiding them

towards academic and social success. Mentors provide support, advice, encouragement, and friendship to students. The

key is that the mentee realizes what success looks like. Peer mentoring has proven to increase student retention. A

comprehensive inventory of peer mentoring activities is needed and more training and resources are also needed for

peer mentors.

The committee recommends:

1) Probation requirement of enrollment in UC 143 with an additional 1-credit lab component.

2) Readmitted students (those who were suspended) complete the student success program of UC 011 and peer

mentoring.

3) Collect information about where peer mentoring is occurring on campus, training, compensation, etc.

4) Accumulate resources about peer mentoring so program coordinators can access timely and relevant research

and resources.

13

Change of Major Flow

During the process of reviewing the Student Success Model, Director of Enrollment Management Aaron Aure provided

SDSU “student flow” data which was analyzed by EAB. The data clusters majors into one of four broad classifications in

terms of student tenacity to the major, as described below:

Appendix E provides a comprehensive summary chart for most majors on the size of major, inflow into the major,

outflow away from the major, frequency percentage, and a directionality ratio. The directionality ratio is the inflow

divided by the outflow; above 1 means more inflow than outflow so the major tends to accept more than it donates; less

than 1 means less inflow than outflow so the major donates more students than it accepts; 1 means equal inflow and

outflow of the student in and out of the major.

An important note about the data is that it is only reflective of students who succeeded and graduated from SDSU. This

is an interesting point to observe, but leaves a gap in terms of understanding major changes for those students who do

not persist at SDSU.

Nonetheless, the information is informative as to which majors tend to attract or recruit incoming students most readily,

and which majors tend to be a welcoming home for students when they decide that a change of major is needed. More

analysis is needed to know if patterns exist with this data concerning students changing out of one major (e.g., nursing)

who commonly select another major (e.g., early childhood education). With this information, advisors can be more

proactive in working with students who wish to change their major.

The SSC platform can also be used to address students’ major changing patterns. At times, students may declare a

major which is not a good fit and need assistance in identifying alternatives. By using the historical SDSU data, the

predictive capability of the platform can help match student’s academic strengths with alternative majors.

14

Proposed New Model and Recommendations

Based on the work outlined above, a new model for student success was developed. The model is web-based with a

“click and learn” feature for students. The strategy map contains the following stages:

Connection Pre-enrollment What will you do to be prepared for college?

Acclimation Year One How can you get off to a strong start at SDSU?

Alignment Years Two and Three How will you make the most of your college experience?

Transition Year Four What will you do to be prepared for your next step?

Throughout the SDSU Experience How can you ensure your overall success as a student?

Within each stage, students can link to a number of programs which are designed to facilitate student success during a

particular time in their college experience. The model also includes an assessment plan.

15

Beyond refreshing the student success model and strategy map, four major recommendations emerged including:

Utilize a risk (data) analysis for the entering freshmen class to assess propensity for success and/or level of risk for retention. Based on this data, differentiated advising will be developed to address unique needs.

Develop a proxy for grit, whereby students swipe their ID card at strategic locations to determine those students who are engaged, attending class, and generally accessing university resources. Based on this, develop an intervention for minimally engaged students. This data is most powerful early in the semester.

Refine the change-of-major flow analysis and then develop proactive strategies to facilitate student movement from one major to another; improve change of major process.

Implement probation and suspension course requirements, and strengthen peer mentoring.

In addition, each sub-group made recommendations which can be found in their section reports in the previous pages. The nature of the specific recommendations is summarized here.

First Year Experience Recommendations related to the First Year Experience largely involved adjustments to existing initiatives begun during the original Student Success Model. Learning Communities should be rebranded as “First Year Interest Groups” and should transition to an opt-in (voluntary) model for academic departments with focus beyond shared schedules. As often as possible, First Year Interest Groups should also connect with residential Living Learning Communities. New implementation teams should be created around Exploratory Studies and the College Student Inventory (CSI), and a point person should be identified for data collection and management related to student success. A clearinghouse for peer mentoring information should also be developed, and departments should develop or enhance work to celebrate completion milestones leading from a successful first to second year. During the first year and beyond, a new approach to assisting struggling students should include an expansion of the Readmit Success Program into a broader “Program for Academic Recovery” to include both readmitted and probationary students. Mid-Semester Success Courses could further assist this student population. Further details on all recommendations are available on page 6.

Years 2 and 3 High Impact Curriculum and Engagement – This is the first priority identified by the work group. Actively and intentionally engaging students in their learning and social experiences will foster stronger connections and satisfaction among students and likely increase faculty and staff satisfaction. This particular modification will require the hard work of colleagues across campus to commit to modifying instructional modalities, methodologies, and student engagement practices. Advising outreach to undeclared second-year students – The Student Success Collaborative (SSC) should be widely implemented to assist advisors as they work with students in the second year who are unsure of their major or who have not declared a major. Academic Advisors can reach out to second-year students who have yet to declare a major to engage them in conversation about the student’s plan. A meaningful conversation about what the student wants out of his or her experience and utilization of proper resources can be a significant decision in the student’s life.

Pre-Enrollment and Senior Year

Recommendations can be found on page 8 and include increased intentional outreach to admitted students from the University’s academic units (e.g. Colleges, departments, programs) in addition to admission, pre-orientation placement testing, and enhanced services to transfer students. In addition, opportunities for deeper student engagement and career and professional development should be expanded through student organizations, study abroad, service learning, academic competitions/teams, undergraduate research, and internships. Integrative capstone experiences should be required of seniors in all majors, and the change of major process should be improved for all students. The senior year handbook should be further developed, and the utilization of data from senior exit interviews/surveys should be optimized across campus. Finally, undergraduate student connections to the SDSU Alumni Association should be improved through communication and programming. Alumni survey and job placement data should inform further development of the Student Success Model.

16

Appendix A

Agendas of Task Force Meetings

All agendas can be found on Inside State at the link below

https://insidestate.sdstate.edu/academics/Master%20Library/Forms/AllItems.aspx?RootFolder=%2Facademics

%2FMaster%20Library%2FStudent%20Success%20Task%20Force&FolderCTID=0x012000F1B67664BC097

F4AB4DD6258AA5566CC&View={EED92D9A-F96B-4B94-AE40-

EAB0D5DB1985}&InitialTabId=Ribbon.Document&VisibilityContext=WSSTabPersistence

17

Appendix B

Student Success Model Initiatives: Year 1 – Priorities for Implementation/Change

Year 1: Require Few Resources

Strategy Recommendation Notes Include in Model? Year of Implementation

Celebrating Completion Milestones*

As a starting point, incorporate celebrations in advisee transition events. Expand the number of transition events each year. (Increased from 2 in 2014 to 12 in 2015) Initiating Office: FYAC

Can be done with few resources How would this process look for students who aren’t advised in the FYAC? What general topics should be addressed consistently?

No 2015-16 pilot

Exploratory Studies Develop team with reps from each of the three areas that support exploratory studies students. Initiating Offices: FYAC, OCD, and UC faculty

Existing connections with Focus 2 and Explore State LLC.

Already included 2015-16

Year 1: Require Significant Resources

Strategy Recommendation Notes Include in Model? Year of Implementation

College Student Inventory (CSI)

Continue to use it, incorporate as part of the regression model. Create an implementation team to develop the implementation plan for timing/method of CSI, as well as integration into Starfish. Initiating Offices: FYAC, NSO, Office of Planning, Decision Support, and

CSI Outcomes from FA11: 11 of 17 subscales predict cGPA

12 of 17 subscales predict academic standing

10 of 17 subscales predict persistence

CSI Form B integrates with Starfish. Do we want this information about our students? If we eliminate the CSI, how will we collect it?

Yes, Year 1 2015-16 Further development for 2016-17

18

Assessment, Res Life

Learning Communities Rename to: First Year Interest Groups

Keep Learning Communities as an opt-in program. Develop true learning communities rather than just block scheduling. Responsibility will fall to departments who opt in to make the learning connections and to ensure that enough seats are available in the LC courses to accommodate students who aren’t part of the LC. Consider connections between LC’s and Living Learning Communities with similar themes/characteristics to integrate academic content in students’ daily lives. Initiating Offices: Academic Affairs and Registrar

Outcomes 42% of students stay in their originally

assigned LC

IDEA survey FA12: To what extent did the LC help you? (some to very much): o Build connections with others in your

field of study: 86% o Feel “at home” at SDSU: 87.8% o Understand different points of view:

90.6% o Make new friends: 91.9% o Encourage you to study: 84.6%

Associate Dean/Department Head Response Continue to use LC’s: 11

Eliminate LC’s: 7

No Preference/Response: 5

Already included Maintain for 2015-16 Move to opt-in model for 2016-17

Throughout the SDSU Experience: Require Significant Resources

Strategy Recommendation Notes Include in Model? Year of Implementation

Mid-semester Success Course*

Offer several courses that start at midterm, including some with a student success focus. Initiating Offices: Academic Affairs and University College

Other BOR institutions are doing this, and SDSU students are registering for these courses. It would help students who are off track implement the skills they need to get back on track and would help students maintain scholarship eligibility.

Yes – throughout all years

Spring 2016 pilot Full implementation 2016-17

19

Peer Mentoring Develop a peer mentoring clearinghouse:

Step 1: collect information about where peer mentoring is occurring on campus, training, compensation, etc.

Step 2: accumulate resources about peer mentoring so program coordinators can access timely and relevant research and resources.

Initiating Offices: SSM Task Force Year 1 Subgroup and then UGSEC

Peer mentoring is identified as a key student success and retention strategy by many resources, including the Playbook for Success, Hardwiring, and the Strategies Map.

Already included Step 1: 2015-16

Academic* Success Program Recommend name change to Program for Academic Recovery

Lock course schedules for readmits. Consider alternate plan for probation students, requiring UC 143 for all probation students who haven’t already completed the course with an additional 1-credit lab component. Probation students who already have completed UC 143 with a grade of “C” or better would take just the lab component of the course. Initiating Office: University College

Outcomes

86% of readmits who participate in the program continue on good standing

Students indicate that the peer mentoring component of the program is helpful

Probation students need to have an experience that is unique from the readmit student experience. Implementing a required course or program would ensure that all probation students receive structured support.

Already included Spring 2016 pilot

Retention/Student Success Data Manager*

Identify a person in the Planning, Decision Support and Assessment office to serve as the point person for data collection and management related to SSM Programs Initiating Office: Planning, Decision Support and Assessment

Work closely with program directors/ coordinators to collect data to determine what is working and what is not working. Consider advisory meetings through which program coordinators/directors come together to discuss their programs and potential for collaboration.

No, but their contact information should be identified in SSM materials

2015-16

20

Student Success Model Initiatives: Year 1 Presented 2/19/15

Year 1 Strategies Current Status Recommendation

Common Read Institutionalized

Consistent Residence Hall Programs

Institutionalized

Early Alert System Institutionalized with Recommendation

Mandatory Attendance Tracking (Student Engagement and Retention Map)

Exploratory Studies Institutionalized with Recommendation

Clarify roles and strengthen partnership between the three providers: UC 102/L faculty, FYAC advisors, Office of Career Development

First Year Advising Center Institutionalized

First Year Seminar Partially Institutionalized: Lacks consistency in format and transition content*

Develop common topics/lesson plans – could resiliency or other topic be a common theme?

Living Learning Communities Institutionalized with Recommendation

Residence Hall Faculty Fellows (Student Engagement and Retention Map)

Learning Communities Partially Institutionalized: Block scheduling is institutionalized, but lacks development of true learning communities

Consider linking to specific populations (LLC, specific majors, etc.) rather than implementing for all first-year students

Meet State Institutionalized

Peer Mentoring Programs Institutionalized with Recommendation

Create an information clearinghouse that maintains a directory of peer mentoring programs at SDSU and provides resources for those who oversee such programs

TRiO Student Support Services Institutionalized

Readmit Success Program Institutionalized with Recommendation

Consider tiered approach: Level I course for probation students and Level II course for readmits

Honors College Institutionalized

Wintrode Tutoring Program Institutionalized

Supplemental Instruction Institutionalized

*Upon consultation with Drs. Helling and Sackreiter, this group determined that the current First Year Seminar approach fits SDSU’s institutional structure.

21

Recommendations for New Initiatives: Celebrating Completion Milestones (Playbook for Student Success Webinar) College Student Inventory: Develop implementation team to identify whether or not this should continue at

SDSU and, if so, what is the best way to use the information Financial Intervention (Previous Noel-Levitz data for SDSU, Complete College America)

Financial aid packaging

Workshops

Emergency grant funding

FAFSA reapplication interventions Mid-semester Recovery Course(s): Offer courses that can start at mid-semester to replace courses that might

get dropped in order to keep at “full-time”; Include course with a focus on developing/supporting skills, such as UC 143 - Mastering Lifetime Learning Skills (Student Engagement and Retention Map)

Create Retention/Student Success Manager or Office (Hardwiring Student Success) Service Learning

22

Appendix C

Student Success: Years 2 – 3 | ALIGNMENT – Edited 2015-04-29

Topic Action / Activities / Notes

Second Year Support Social Media Event*

Transfer Program

Summer Outreach: For example, send a letter home in summer* to remind students of their plan and remind of resources available to them

Continue events in Wintrode Student Success Center

Undergraduate Research Provide and promote undergraduate research opportunities for 2nd and 3rd year students

LEADSTATE (no new recommendation)

High Impact Activities and Curriculum

For faculty and staff: Articulate high impact activities and pedagogy. Implement or continue in:

o UC 109 and other 109 courses o SGR’s o Any course or program deemed appropriate by the College o Student programming and training

Professional Advising Model

Professional advisor paired with faculty mentor

Focused academic advising (perhaps utilizing quadrant model)*

Advising Outreach to Undeclared 2nd year Students*

Study Abroad (no new recommendation)

Living/Learning Communities

Continue to promote ability to transition from 1st year to 2nd year

Potential Leadership LLC for transition from 2nd to 3rd year

Recommended for Addition:

Topic Action / Activities / Notes

Academic Support Wintrode Student Success Center Tutoring Program

Supplemental Instruction

Financial Wellness Include financial resources in summer letter

Provide academic advisors with financial resource information to share with students

Observe student debt task force findings and recommendations o Establish collaboration among various academic and student affairs initiatives to

provide financial wellness education to SDSU community

Study Abroad Continue successes and improvements

National Student Exchange Continue successes and improvements

Internship Opportunities Continue successes and improvements

Student Employment Continue successes and improvements

Service Learning Continue successes and improvements

Prioritization of asterisked items:

1. High Impact Curriculum and Engagement

2. Adequate staffing in Financial Aid to provide outreach and programming

3. Advising outreach to undeclared second-year students

4. Letter home in summer

5. Social Media Event

23

Appendix D

Proxy for Grit

The following are recommendations from the subcommittee regarding data to start collecting regarding proxies for grit. Ultimately, this data would feed into a more overarching data model. Interventions could range from proactive (e.g., a marketing campaign of first week to-do’s); to passive (e.g., emails or phone calls from advisors or residence hall staff); to personalized and technologically-savvy (e.g., a smart phone app that pushes out notices personalized to the student). RE-EVALUATING CURRENT DATA COLLECTION CSI. Maintain administration of Form B for Fall 2015.

Create implementation team to look more closely at current CSI practices, to include: o Timing of administration – should CSI be administered earlier than move-in weekend and be used to

inform risk profile? o Intersection with Starfish – can we integrate data from CSI into Starfish system to inform intervention? o Align practice with Noel-Levitz recommendations to greatest degree possible.

CLASS ATTENDANCE Class Attendance. Introduce ID card proximity readers in classrooms with large first year attendance (by room).

SRO D = 15 MATH (102) sections, 2 BIOL 101 sections, 3 CHEM (106 & 112) sections, and 1 PSYC 101 section

SNP 024 = 4 MATH 095 sections

SAE 100 = 6 MATH (102 & 121) sections, 2 PSYC 101 sections Class Attendance. Introduce ID card proximity readers in sections with traditionally high first year enrollment and/or high DFW rate (by class).

ACCT 210 = SRO A, SRO B, SRO C, SRO G, SWG 114, SWG 131

BIOL 101 = SRO D

CHEM 106 & 112 = SRO D, SDS 100

HDFS 210 = SRO D

MATH 095 & 102 = NPB 024, SRO D

MATH 121 = SAE 100, SRO G

PSYC 101 = SAE 100, SRO D

SOC 100 = NPB 184, SDAM 104, SRO C

SPCM 101 = SAV 041, SAS 126, SRO B, SRO C, SRO F Blackboard company is scheduled to introduce software/hardware summer 2015 that will assist in this process. There was also discussion of the creation of a smart phone application to assist in attendance monitoring. RESOURCE USAGE ID Card Usage. Capture ID swipe data at key usage centers.

Use card readers at academic support centers or programs. o Use TutorTrac data for Wintrode Tutoring Program. o Use TutorTrac data Writing Center. o Math Help Center in SHH 128 and SNP 024. o Chemistry Resource Room in SAV 246. o Larson Commons for Late Night Larson. o Supplemental Instruction sessions (SI leader could have portable reader).

24

Use card readers during first year advisor office visits.

Capture data about meal plan usage for first year students. o Run list of students who use 50% less dining credit than recommended in first week, have hall staff

follow up; repeat for weeks two and three.

Capture data about Wellness Center usage for first year students.

Use card readers during residence hall mandatory meetings. D2L Usage. Run list of first year students who haven’t accessed course pages in their D2L accounts.

List sent to advisors and hall staff for intervention.

25

Appendix E

Major Flow

Definitions

SIZE The number of students who ever declared this major at this institution (only considering

students who started sometime between Aug 2001 and Aug 2009)

INFLOW The number of students who declared this major after declaring another (i.e. this is their

destination that they switched to)

OUTFLOW The number of students who declared this major before declaring another (i.e. this is the

major that they were leaving from)

DIRECTIONALITY_RATIO

The INFLOW divided by the OUTFLOW which gives you the ratio of inflow to outflow.

Above 1 means more inflow than outflow, Less than q means less inflow than outflow, 1

means equal

FREQUENCY_PERCENTAGE Of the students who ever declared this major what percentage of them switched majors

at least once. (Note: declaring a major after being "Undeclared" is not considered a major

switch)

26

27

28

29

30

31