Examining Student Engagement by Field of Study Annual Results 2010 National Advisory Board
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Major Differences: Examining Student Engagement by Field of Study Annual Results 2010 National Advisory Board Douglas Bennett Patrick Terenzini President, Earlham College Distinguished Professor and Senior Scientist, Center for the Study of Higher Education, Molly Corbett Broad The Pennsylvania State University President, American Council on Education Judith Torney-Purta Peter Ewell, Chair Professor of Human Development, University of Maryland Vice President, National Center for Higher Education Management Systems (NCHEMS) William Tyson Karen Hanson President, Morrison and Tyson Communications Executive Vice President, Indiana University, and Provost, Indiana University Bloomington Ex Officio Muriel A. Howard John Kennedy President, American Association of State Colleges Director, Center for Survey Research, and Universities (AASCU) Indiana University Bloomington Pat Hutchings Kay McClenney Senior Associate, The Carnegie Foundation Director, Community College Survey for the Advancement of Teaching of Student Engagement Stanley Ikenberry Regent Professor and President Emeritus, University of Illinois Mary Sapp Assistant Vice President, University of Miami “Colleges and universities derive enormous internal value from participating in NSSE; of equal importance is the reassurance to their external publics that a commitment to undergraduate education and its improvement is a high priority.” — Muriel A. Howard, President, American Association of State Colleges and Universities Suggested citation National Survey of Student Engagement. (2010). Major differences: Examining student engagement by field of study—annual results 2010. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research. Cover Images Front Cover Back Cover Left–Robert Morris University Left–California State University-Fresno Right–Northwestern College Center–McGill University Right–Radford University Table of Contents Foreword ............................................................................3 Director’s Message .............................................................5 Quick Facts .........................................................................7 Selected Results .................................................................9 Engagement within the Disciplines .............................................. 10 BCSSE and FSSE...................................................................... 15 The Engagement of Student Veterans.......................................... 17 Exploring New Dimensions of Learning and Engagement ................ 19 High-Impact Practices ...................................................... 22 Using NSSE Data .............................................................. 23 NSSE Institute for Effective Educational Practice .......... 27 Looking Ahead ................................................................. 29 References and Resources ............................................... 30 Benchmarks of Effective Educational Practice .............. 31 Participating Colleges and Universities: 2000–2010 ...... 43 NSSE Staff ......................................................................... 50 The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) documents dimensions of quality in undergraduate education and provides information and assistance to colleges, universities, and other organizations to improve student learning. Its primary activity is annually surveying college students to assess the extent to which they engage in educational practices associated with high levels of learning and development. Annual Results 2010 is sponsored by The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Sacred Heart University Foreword Making Assessment Count For at least a half century, American higher education has seen we believe campuses need to shift from the routine collection of itself at the crossroads, at some pivotal point, or in a time of assessment data to a more thoughtful analysis and constructive “crisis.” True enough, every era presents challenges and choices use of assessment data. to colleges and universities. Over the years, our responses to these In a nutshell, here is what last year’s survey revealed. About challenges have been consequential, creating and sustaining one three-quarters of the institutions surveyed had a common set of of the most admired systems of higher learning in the world. learning outcomes for all students. These outcomes tended to be Still, the current environment is daunting. The premium on measured using a combination of institution- and program-level higher learning continues to escalate. What students know assessment approaches. While the most competitive colleges and and are able to do—their ability to analyze complex issues, universities appeared to collect information at similar rates to less communicate effectively, and contribute to the welfare of selective institutions, they appeared not to use the results nearly society—has never been more important. Access to higher as much. education must expand and the performance and success rates Campuses claimed their assessment agendas were less driven by of students must improve. external state agency or regulatory pressures than by accredita- Meeting those expectations, however, is a formidable challenge tion and the desire to improve. At the same time, regional and in the present environment. We became one of the most admired specialized accreditation was the primary use for assessment systems of higher learning in the world, at least in part, because data. Campus budgets for assessment were painfully small, of the United States’ comparative wealth and its capacity to although, at least at that time—more than a year ago—assess- invest in expanding access to higher education without compro- ment budgets seemed to be holding more or less constant despite mising quality. Today, those advantages have clearly diminished. the economic downturn. The United States and much of the world finds itself in the grip We often parse the discussion of learning outcomes assessment of the deepest and most prolonged economic downturn since into two broad categories: assessment for purposes of institu- the Great Depression. Endowments have suffered. Virtually tional accountability and assessment intended to guide program every public university has experienced cuts in state support. improvement. Peter Ewell, part of the NILOA team as well as Even the most affluent independent colleges have had to tighten NSSE’s design team, has written eloquently and thoughtfully their belts. Tuition continues to rise as family incomes stagnate, about the tensions between these two uses and how they can be threatening access to both public and independent campuses. effectively managed. One can imagine a slow but prolonged downward spiral in which both access and academic quality in American higher education NSSE and other assessment data are are endangered. more important than ever before, yet In tough times, evidence-based decision making takes on added it is the wise use of assessment data by relevance. For more than a decade, the National Survey of faculty and academic leaders that cries Student Engagement has provided campuses a means of gath- ering valuable evidence about what students are doing with the out for attention. resources for learning that their school provides. NSSE and other assessment data are more important than ever before, yet it is the Much of the threat surrounding the accountability aspect of wise use of assessment data by faculty and academic leaders that assessment revolves around transparency. If fear of public expo- cries out for attention. sure prevents campuses from asking the hard questions about how well the institution and students are performing, transpar- Last year, NSSE founding director George Kuh and I released ency may not always be an unmitigated good. On the other a report through the National Institute for Learning Outcomes hand, sharing assessment information is helpful to trustees as Assessment (NILOA) summarizing findings from a national they seek to become more knowledgeable about student learning; survey of provosts. We found more evidence of outcomes assess- to prospective students and parents who need more and better ment by campuses and programs than we expected, but we also information; to policy makers and analysts to inform decisions; found less evidence that assessment data were actually being used and to other institutions as they search for useful and productive to make decisions and improve programs. As a consequence, approaches to learning outcomes assessment. 3 National Survey of Student Engagement | Annual Results 2010 NILOA also examined a specific aspect of transparency by scan- and used their data in powerful ways, as chronicled annually in ning the institutional Web sites of a sample of 725 campuses. the “Using NSSE Data” section of this report and in NSSE’s bien- Comparing the 2009 NILOA survey responses with what we nial publication, Lessons from the Field. Many institutions are found on the Web sites revealed that campuses tended to report working to do so. Yet on too many campuses, NSSE results seem more assessment activity than what appeared online. And when to remain unexamined and without any material consequence. campuses did have assessment results online, the information was If the United States is to achieve the goals for expanded access generally not easily accessible, but typically buried in academic and success that many believe are crucial, and if the quality and