College and University Expenditures in Addressing Patterns of Student Disengagement Ashley Finley, Dickinson College, BTtoP Lynn Swaner, Long Island University-CW.

College and University

Expenditures in Addressing Patterns

of Student DisengagementAshley Finley, Dickinson College, BTtoP

Lynn Swaner, Long Island University-CW Post

Common understanding of the problem

Common understanding of how to fix the problem

RESOURCES

To identify and itemize costs related to resources, personnel and programming used to address symptoms of student disengagement

Gather information through campus collaboration

Analyze aggregate data to identify, describe, and interpret trends over time (FY 2001-2002 and FY 2006-2007)

Timeline: January 1, 2008 – September 8, 2008 Recruitment, instrument development, data

collection, analysis, and final report Data entered onto secure website

Sample of 9 schools Spans geographic location, number of students ,

institutional type & mission (see Carnegie Class. below)

Carnegie Classification 2006-2007 N %

Arts 1 11.1

Bac/AS: Baccalaureate Colleges-Arts & Sciences

1 11.1

Baccalaureate Liberal Arts 1 11.1

Doctoral; Research Intensive 1 11.1

Master’s L (Master’s Colleges & Univ./Larger progs.)

1 11.1

Master’s S (Master’s Colleges & Univ./Smaller progs.)

1 11.1

Professional Art School 1 11.1

RU/VH (Research Univ./Very high research activity)

2 11.1

1. Institutional Data2. Counseling and Psychological Services3. Alcohol/Substance Abuse Prevention4. Security/Emergency Services/Crisis Response5. Civic Engagement6. Engaged Learning Efforts7. Student Activities/Residential Life8. Institutional & Funded Research9. Judicial Affairs10. Insurance*11. Legal Counsel* Types of allocations = Total operating

budget, specific programming budgets, total # of staff, salaries, programming hours, # student participants, “In-kind” funding (any donated resources, i.e. volunteered time, donated money or other material resources)

39%42%

28%

14%10%

6%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Total Operating Budget

Undergrad Tuition

Room & Board

Total # Undergrads

Total # FT Faculty

Total # Administrative Staff

Programmatic spending generally increasedRelated to direct responses to well-being

(counseling, alcohol programming)Related to direct responses to outcomes

(security services, judicial affairs) Demand for services has increased over time

Staff has stagnated or declined

53%43%

20%

133%

31%41%

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

120.00%

140.00%

Student Visits Counseling Center

Clinical Hours

% Students Receiving Services

Alcohol Programming Hours

Security Services

Judicial Hrs

19%

31% 33%

79%

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

EL: Student

EL: Faculty

CE: Student Part. Leadership ProgsCE: Fac. Part. CE Progs

Engaged learningWide variation in spending patternsSpending per student showed deficit

spending or modest increaseIndication that faculty training is

increasing Civic engagement

Substantial increases over timeThe good news about missing data?

Composite variable of average change across budget years related to resources central to engaged learning, civic engagement, mental health and alcohol/substance use

Approximately 67.6% increase in spending over time

Resource allocations by type of institutionPrivate institutions in the sample spent

more total $ but decreased spending by 5% between budget years vs.

Public institutions spent less total $ but increased budget allocations to these areas by 15.4%

1) Budget accountabilityBuild silos with glass walls

2) Programming & StaffingScarcity is the mother of invention Use expertise as a basis for innovation

3) Assessing allocations as preventive & responsive measuresWhat if programs built foundations that

helped students help themselves/and others? Social support, fulfillment, engagement

Recruit Stakeholders Think beyond leaders to constituency leaders

(including students) Recruit the dissenters Distribute ownership of programmatic

development, practices and results Find what you do best

What is the gem of your institutional culture/mission?

What/where is the unique quality of your institutional backdrop upon which you can capitalize? Consider location, local community resources, student body

Fuse new to old What is already working? Where are resources already going? Consider how existing programs can be

expanded or used to catalyze new efforts.