2013 Institute on High-Impact Practices and Student Success

2013 Institute on High-Impact Practices and Student Success June 11 – 14, 2013  University of Wisconsin  Madison, Wisconsin Action Plan Georgia Perimeter College

This template is offered to help you shape your campus action plan. It is not meant to be prescriptive and should be adapted to your specific project goals and institutional context.

BACKGROUND Georgia Perimeter College (GPC) is a two-year branch of the University System of Georgia that serves over 22,000 students at five campuses in the Atlanta metropolitan area and online. GPC is primarily a transfer institution that draws students from diverse ethnic and economic backgrounds.

GPC participated in the Phase I of the Roadmap Project. Phase I of our Roadmap Project took the form of a pilot study that investigated how a tailored student educational program including a First Year Seminar, a Learning Community, and project-based learning modules can affect critical and creative thinking, written and oral communication, teamwork and problem solving, and measures of academic success such as GPA and academic persistence. Overall, students reacted positively to the program, expressed increased knowledge of academic life, increased engagement with others on campus, and increased critical and creative thinking skills—all of which lead to an increased expectation that students will complete their two-year degree and advance to further undergraduate study.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND GOALS During Phase I, GPC also established a Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) based on using engaged learning practices in targeted courses to improve selected learning outcomes. GPC’s Phase II Roadmap Project is based on our QEP and will be administered by staff in the recently- established QEP Office. The QEP is titled “EDGE: Engagement Drives GPC Education.” As part of the QEP, 9 courses have been chosen to receive EDGE interventions between fall 2013 and fall 2016. Courses targeted for EDGE interventions were selected based on being taken by (or required for) large numbers of students, having undesirably high non-success (grades of D or F or course withdrawal) rates, and representing multiple disciplines and curricular areas: English 1101 and 1102, History 1111, 2111, and 2112, Communications 1201, Georgia Perimeter College Seminar 1010, Political Science 1101, and Environmental Science 1401.

Faculty teaching targeted courses began receiving training in specific EDGE strategies starting spring 2013 semester to prepare for implementation in their courses. Four EDGE strategies were selected for implementation based on review of the literature and best practices: 1) two forms of active learning: a) collaborative learning and b) problem-based learning, and 2) two forms of community-based learning: a) service learning and b) community-based research. The degree to which EDGE strategies are actually implemented in the targeted courses will be assessed using multiple measures, including student surveys, faculty surveys, and review of faculty syllabi. This QEP aims to change behaviors, attitudes, and learning outcomes. Behaviors: Students will be more likely to persist in their courses; faculty will increase their focus and skills in making their courses engaging. Attitudes: Students will perceive their courses as more relevant and will report greater engagement as part of their overall college experience. Learning outcomes: Students will improve in their ability to think critically, to make connections between course content and real-world issues, and will perform better on assessments of course content. Targeted outcomes will be assessed before and after implementation of EDGE strategies, with EDGE strategies being implemented in two to three courses per year over the five-year span of the QEP.

We also propose to use the LEAP Essential Learning Outcomes in conjunction with our General Education Outcomes to promote a common language that provides continuity across academic and student services. Further, we plan to begin a conversation about expanding evaluation of entering students to include skills and behavioral competencies in addition to academic knowledge.

BARRIERS TO ACCOMPLISHMENT 1. Although the elements of our QEP are strongly supported by current college administrators, several of GPC’s upper-level administrators – including the President, Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the Executive Vice President for Financial and Administrative Affairs – are serving in an interim capacity, leaving some question as to whether these efforts will be supported beyond the duration and the scope of the QEP.

2. Faculty members currently carry large course loads with limited opportunities for course release and have multiple college service obligations. These time constraints hinder faculty from fully participating in HIPS training opportunities.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR SUPPORT 1. Infrastructure has been developed to support growth, maintain oversight activities, and assess the progress of the QEP. The QEP Office was established in June 2012 with an Executive Director, Community-Based Learning Coordinator, and an Administrative Assistant. Office staff mentor faculty, maintain the QEP website, implement faculty development workshops, and direct the collection and utilization of assessment data to make program improvements. 2. The Office of Student Life has expressed interest in directing more time and resources to the intentional implementation of HIPS in co-curricular programming.

3. Increased numbers of faculty express interest and seek training in the implementation of HIPS in their courses.

ENGAGEMENT PLAN FOR STAKEHOLDERS Our stakeholders include: students, faculty, academic and upper-level administrators, ACRS (Advising, Counseling, and Retention Services) and Student Life staff, and community partners.  Students: Enroll in an “EDGE” class, interact with faculty outside of class, participate in on-campus and off-campus activities like student clubs, GPC Reads, Bridging Cultures, Democracy Commitment, and Days of Service, and respond to student surveys when requested.  Faculty: The QEP necessitates that faculty teaching particular courses will use HIP strategies. Current face-to-face training will be supplemented with online professional development opportunities. Contingent upon the availability of financial resources, the QEP Office will offer an intensive, two-semester, incentive-based professional development program for faculty teaching QEP courses. Department meetings will also be used as a venue for discussing and promoting HIPS.  Academic and upper-level administrators: This group has already approved the QEP, so little direct engagement will be needed until a new cadre of administrators is selected.  ACRS: Meet with staff and provide them with written material (flyers, handouts, etc.) to explain the QEP.  Student Life: Work with staff and student leaders to incorporate QEP outcomes into co- curricular programming.  Community partners: As opportunities arise for partnerships to implement community- based pedagogies, explain the goals of QEP and solicit ideas on achieving those goals while meeting the community-identified need.

COMMUNICATION STRATEGY Building on the extensive QEP communication plan that includes banners, posters, t-shirts and the website, most of the communication strategy will involve building relationships with various stakeholders as discussed in the previous section.

EVIDENCE OF SUCCESS (How will we know we’re making progress?) The QEP aims to change behaviors, attitudes, course-specific learning outcomes, and critical thinking (see Project Description). Assessment of these goals will take place within the context of ongoing assessment at Georgia Perimeter College (GPC) and will harness some of this ongoing assessment in service of the QEP (CCSSE, CAT) in addition to developing appropriate QEP-specific assessments. Specific QEP assessment uses multiple measures, including student and faculty surveys to gage perceptions, and a three-fold review of faculty syllabi by QEP Office staff, faculty, and students.