Print

Print


Interesting, Leonard, no matter what coin of the realm we consider, the
motivation issue comes up.  Our chancellor even told our entire academic
affairs unit: no one is questioning whether you all do good work, it's how
much it costs and for how much benefit.

Eric, thanks for the info about TQ.  The other issue we have is getting our
campus, which is in an anti-survey mood, to add anything campus-wide.

Best,
-Marcia


On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Eric McIntosh <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> Marcia, et al.,
>
> I would suggest you consider using the Thriving Quotient as you build your
> models. See http://www.thrivingincollege.org. The Thriving Quotient
> measures malleable psychosocial characteristics across five factors that
> we have found are predictive of student success outcomes îimportant╣ to
> higher education (e.g., GPA, persistence). Academic Determination and
> Engaged Learning (two of the five factors) may prove valuable in your
> analysis (as I would expect overall thriving may too) in understanding and
> controlling for some of the aspects the student brings to the equation.
> Use of the TQ broadly also would allow you to create individual plans for
> students as they seek support if you knew how they compared to a peer in
> levels of thriving.
>
> Just some food for thought.
>
> Best,
>
> Eric
>
> Eric McIntosh, PhD
> Vice President For Student Development
> T:780.465.3500 ext. 8105
> F:780.465.3534
> The King's University College
> www.kingsu.ca
>
>
>
>
>
> On 1/9/2014, 8:39 AM, "Marcia Toms" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> >Sara, I think those are great statistical analyses to do, but I would
> >argue
> >that the statistical model still omits the important factor of
> >motivation/self-regulation/grit/what-have-you.
> >
> >I thought propensity scores, the new darling of education research, would
> >help address this factor, but from my reading/discussions with
> >statisticians, we still have the same problem: there is an aspect we
> >believe accounts for some significant portion of the dependent variable
> >(here, motivation accounts for some portion of a student's final course
> >grade/retention rate/graduation rate/etc...) and we don't have any way to
> >include that aspect in the model.  The best we can get to is using the
> >students previous gpa (at the institution because high school GPAs weren't
> >as accurate).  We can make the claim that a student's previous gpa is an
> >indicator of motivation, but it's also an indicator of many other things
> >such as background knowledge, coursework rigor and attendance.  Then we
> >need to worry about how effective an indicator GPA is, plus if it
> >interacts
> >with other factors in the model.
> >
> >We have tried including a segment of the MSLQ in a first-year campus wide
> >survey to get at the motivation question.  We would then use that score as
> >predictor variable, but the response rate was not high enough to get any
> >statistically significant results.
> >
> >Sigh.  I wish there was an easy answer to all this.
> >-Marcia
> >
> >
> >On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Sara Weertz <[log in to unmask]>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Ah, I love this question...one I think I can answer because this used to
> >> be a typical response to Supplemental Instruction (SI) which has a
> >>history
> >> of empirical evidence indicating that students who use SI on a regular
> >> basis get better grades. Faculty often opine that SI students would have
> >> gotten successful grades no matter what; they argue that SI students (or
> >> those who self-select) are already the "good" students.   Faculty
> >>continued
> >> their criticism of the numbers even after I added qualitative
> >> data--feedback from the students themselves, in their own words, saying
> >> they excelled in their coursework because of SI.
> >>
> >> It was, however, more difficult to be critical of my interpretive
> >>report,
> >> which pulls the following data on students enrolled in SI-supported
> >>classes:
> >>
> >> * GPA (at the beginning of the term)
> >> * ACT/SAT scores
> >> * Classification
> >> * Ethnicity
> >> * Residency (on/off campus)
> >> * Major/Minor
> >> * Academic Standing
> >> * Cohort attributes such as athletics, provisional status, international
> >> student, etc.
> >>
> >> If I run the interpretive reports at the beginning of the term, I get a
> >> bird's-eye view of the class, which allows me to also create individual
> >> student profiles.
> >>
> >> The beauty of the interpretive report is its use as a tool to make
> >> predictions about the students in our SI-supported classes. An example
> >> would be to examine how a freshman with several at-risk factors and low
> >>ACT
> >> scores (which tests science acumen) might fare in a traditionally
> >>difficult
> >> biology class. Since our SI support focuses on traditionally difficult
> >> classes where many students struggle, we then make predictions on
> >>success
> >> (A, B, or C) depending on whether the less proficient students and those
> >> considered at-risk attend SI, how often they attend, and when they
> >>attend.
> >> The interpretive report allows us to compile some fascinating reports
> >>for
> >> variety of departments and student services. Our measurements
> >>consistently
> >> show that no matter how many at-risk factors a student may have, the
> >>more
> >> SI visits, the higher the final grade.
> >>
> >> While something like an interpretive report is more difficult to
> >>generate
> >> with tutoring, it can be done.
> >>
> >> sal
> >>
> >>
> >> Sara Weertz, M.Ed.
> >> Executive Director, First Year Experience
> >> ASU Station #10915
> >> Angelo State University
> >> San Angelo, TX  76909
> >> (325) 942-2595
> >> [log in to unmask]
> >>
> >> CRLA President-Elect 2013-2014
> >> www.crla.net
> >>
> >> ****************************************************
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Open Forum for Learning Assistance Professionals [mailto:
> >> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Marcia Toms
> >> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2014 8:32 AM
> >> To: [log in to unmask]
> >> Subject: Re: ROI on Academic Support Services? -- Different Take
> >>
> >> That is great, Leonard.
> >>
> >> One question, though: Do students voluntarily come to your center?  If
> >>so,
> >> how do you address the motivation issue?  In other words, who is to say
> >> that these students wouldn't have higher retention rates anyway?
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> -Marcia
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Roberta Schotka <[log in to unmask]
> >> >wrote:
> >>
> >> > Leonard,
> >> >
> >> > That is brilliant, especially since it is so difficult to link grades
> >> > directly to tutoring, given all of the other contributing factors.
> >> >
> >> > -Roberta
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Geddes, Leonard G.
> >> > <[log in to unmask]
> >> > >wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Melissa and any others who are interested,
> >> > >
> >> > > I have attached part of a report that I sent up to the "powers  that
> >> be"
> >> > > about the influence our services are having on the bottom line --
> >> > > retention. In the past, we communicated how we were affecting
> >> > > academic performance.  However, when it seemed like reporting how
> >> > > students were improving academically was not generating the traction
> >> > > that we thought it deserved, I decided to speak the administration's
> >> > > language by adding a retention element to the report.  In short, we
> >> > > compared the re-enrollment rates of students using our services to
> >> > > general student retention,
> >> > athletic
> >> > > teams, etc.  Our numbers rocked!  (I've attached an abbreviated
> >> > > report since I don't think the administration would like us to share
> >> > > financial info publically.)
> >> > >
> >> > > In the actual report, we put figures to the report by factoring in
> >> > > the "real" revenue that is generated per student. For example,
> >> > hypothetically,
> >> > > if the overall retention rate was 70%, but our numbers were 86%,
> >> > > then we showed numerically how much revenue 16% more students added
> >> > > to the bottom line, thus showing that we are revenue generating.
> >> > >
> >> > > As a result of changing to reporting this way, our reports have been
> >> > going
> >> > > all the way up the chain to the Board.  Recently, they specifically
> >> > > referenced our center and services in the new strategic plan!  We
> >> > > are now preparing for a significant budget increase as well -- yay!
> >> > >
> >> > > I hope this is useful.
> >> > >
> >> > > Leonard Geddes
> >> > > Associate Dean of Co-Curricular Programs Director of the Learning
> >> > > Commons Division of Student Life Lenoir-Rhyne University www.lr.edu
> >> > > [log in to unmask]
> >> > > (828) 328-7024
> >> > > (828) 328-7702 (fax)
> >> > >
> >> > > The LearnWell Projects Blog:
> >> > http://www.thelearnwellprojects.com/thewell/
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >> > To access the LRNASST-L archives or User Guide, or to change your
> >> > subscription options (including subscribe/unsubscribe), point your web
> >> > browser to http://www.lists.ufl.edu/archives/lrnasst-l.html
> >> >
> >> > To contact the LRNASST-L owner, email [log in to unmask]
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Marcia Toms, Ph.D.
> >> Associate Director
> >> Undergraduate Tutorial Center
> >> Division of Academic and Student Affairs North Carolina State University
> >> Campus Box 7118 / 101 Park Shops Raleigh, NC 27695-7118
> >> 919.513.7829
> >> http://www.ncsu.edu/tutorial_center/
> >>
> >> Public Record Reminder: All electronic mail messages in connection with
> >> State business that are sent to or received by this account are subject
> >>to
> >> the NC Public Records Law.  They are retained and may be disclosed to
> >>third
> >> parties.
> >>
> >> Confidentiality: Nothing in the NC Public Records Law diminishes the
> >> privacy protections afforded by federal law (e.g., FERPA, HIPAA, etc.)
> >>
> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >> To access the LRNASST-L archives or User Guide, or to change your
> >> subscription options (including subscribe/unsubscribe), point your web
> >> browser to http://www.lists.ufl.edu/archives/lrnasst-l.html
> >>
> >> To contact the LRNASST-L owner, email [log in to unmask]
> >>
> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >> To access the LRNASST-L archives or User Guide, or to change your
> >> subscription options (including subscribe/unsubscribe), point your web
> >> browser to
> >> http://www.lists.ufl.edu/archives/lrnasst-l.html
> >>
> >> To contact the LRNASST-L owner, email [log in to unmask]
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >Marcia Toms, Ph.D.
> >Associate Director
> >Undergraduate Tutorial Center
> >Division of Academic and Student Affairs
> >North Carolina State University
> >Campus Box 7118 / 101 Park Shops
> >Raleigh, NC 27695-7118
> >919.513.7829
> >http://www.ncsu.edu/tutorial_center/
> >
> >Public Record Reminder: All electronic mail messages in connection with
> >State business that are sent to or received by this account are subject to
> >the NC Public Records Law.  They are retained and may be disclosed to
> >third
> >parties.
> >
> >Confidentiality: Nothing in the NC Public Records Law diminishes the
> >privacy protections afforded by federal law (e.g., FERPA, HIPAA, etc.)
> >
> >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >To access the LRNASST-L archives or User Guide, or to change your
> >subscription options (including subscribe/unsubscribe), point your web
> >browser to
> >http://www.lists.ufl.edu/archives/lrnasst-l.html
> >
> >To contact the LRNASST-L owner, email [log in to unmask]
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> To access the LRNASST-L archives or User Guide, or to change your
> subscription options (including subscribe/unsubscribe), point your web
> browser to
> http://www.lists.ufl.edu/archives/lrnasst-l.html
>
> To contact the LRNASST-L owner, email [log in to unmask]
>



-- 
Marcia Toms, Ph.D.
Associate Director
Undergraduate Tutorial Center
Division of Academic and Student Affairs
North Carolina State University
Campus Box 7118 / 101 Park Shops
Raleigh, NC 27695-7118
919.513.7829
http://www.ncsu.edu/tutorial_center/

Public Record Reminder: All electronic mail messages in connection with
State business that are sent to or received by this account are subject to
the NC Public Records Law.  They are retained and may be disclosed to third
parties.

Confidentiality: Nothing in the NC Public Records Law diminishes the
privacy protections afforded by federal law (e.g., FERPA, HIPAA, etc.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To access the LRNASST-L archives or User Guide, or to change your
subscription options (including subscribe/unsubscribe), point your web browser to
http://www.lists.ufl.edu/archives/lrnasst-l.html

To contact the LRNASST-L owner, email [log in to unmask]