First-Year Student Success: In Search of Best Practice Randy L. Swing, Ph.D. Co-Director, Policy Center on the First Year of College Fellow, National Resource.

First-Year Student Success:In Search of Best Practice

Randy L. Swing, Ph.D.

Co-Director, Policy Center on the First Year of College

Fellow, National Resource Center on The First-Year Experience & Students in Transition

7th Pacific Rim, First Year in Higher Education Conference

QUT Gardens Point Campus July 10, 2003

http://www.brevard.edu/fyc/randy/australia/success.ppt

Overview: In Search of Best Practice

Surveys of Current Practices

Institutions of Excellence

Hallmarks of Excellence

Research on Current Practices

Data Sources:2000 Current Practices Survey

random sample of 621 institution 55% of Chief Academic Officers responded51% of Chief Student Affairs Officers responded

2002 Current Practices Survey1,139 Chief Academic Officers (4-year institutions)57% responded

Full study reports are available at http://www.brevard.edu/fyc/Survey/index.htm

Orientation

Academic Advising

First-Year Seminars

Early Warning Systems

Length of New Student Orientation

1/2 - 1 day14%

<1/2 day2%

1.5 - 2 days32%

>2 days52%

Source: 2001 Current Practices Survey (4-year institutions only)CU

RR

EN

T P

RA

CT

ICE

S -

Orie

ntat

ion

Is New Student Orientation Required? Percent of Institutions

29% 71%Required

Source: 2001 Current Practices Survey (4 year institutions only)CU

RR

EN

T P

RA

CT

ICE

S -

Orie

ntat

ion

Most Orientation Programs Report to the Chief Student Affairs Officer

79%

12%

9%

CAO CSAO Other

2001 Current Practices Survey (4-year institutions only)CU

RR

EN

T P

RA

CT

ICE

S -

Orie

ntat

ion

Required Advising

none2%

some35% all

63%

Source: 2001 Current Practices Survey (4-year institutions)CU

RR

EN

T P

RA

CT

ICE

S -

Adv

isin

g

Who Advises First-Year Students?

faculty72%

professionals 22%

peers2%others

4%

Source: 2001 Current Practices Survey (4-year institutions)CU

RR

EN

T P

RA

CT

ICE

S -

Adv

isin

g

Structure of Academic Advising

all centralized

22%

no centralized

43%

some centralized

35%

Source: 2001 Current Practices Survey (4-year institutions)CU

RR

EN

T P

RA

CT

ICE

S -

Adv

isin

g

Proportion of Responding Campuses with at Least Some Undeclared 1st-Year Students

92%

* n = 993Source: Current Practices Survey 2002- Policy Center on the First Year of College

CU

RR

EN

T P

RA

CT

ICE

S -

Adv

isin

g

Who Advises Undeclared Students?

51%

8%

41%

Faculty Professional Advisors Other

* n = 915 (2-yr & 4-yr institutions combined) Source: Current Practices Survey 2002- Policy Center on the First Year of CollegeC

UR

RE

NT

PR

AC

TIC

ES

- A

dvis

ing

How campuses use undergraduates (peers)

in first-year services

25

48

85

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Advising

FYS

Tutoring

Percent of campuses

* n = 994 (FYS) 962 (tutoring) 923 (advising) Source: Current Practices Survey 2002- Policy Center on the First Year of CollegeC

UR

RE

NT

PR

AC

TIC

ES

– A

dvis

ing/

FY

S

Proportion of Responding Campuses that Enroll Some Students in

a First-Year Seminar

6% no

YES94%

* n = 980Source: Current Practices Survey 2002- Policy Center on the First Year of CollegeC

UR

RE

NT

PR

AC

TIC

ES

- F

YS

Required/ Not Required

required for all50%

required for some

30%

elective for all20%

Source: National Resource Center on The First-Year Experience, 2000 SurveyCU

RR

EN

T P

RA

CT

ICE

S -

FY

S

First-Year Seminars1 hour

45%

2 hours16%

3 hours28%

>3 hours11%

Source: National Resource Center on The First-Year Experience, 2000 Survey

2%

16%

82%

Contact hours per week

Letter graded

CU

RR

EN

T P

RA

CT

ICE

S -

FY

S

Linked Courses

11%16%

73%

Few or no sections linked

Some Linked Most Linked

CU

RR

EN

T P

RA

CT

ICE

S -

FY

S

Level of Engaging Pedagogy Used

Course/Experience Included: A variety of teaching methodsMeaningful class discussionsChallenging assignmentsProductive use of classroom timeEncouragement to speak in classEncouragement for students to work together

Meaningful homework

Key Predictor of FYS Learning Outcomes

CU

RR

EN

T P

RA

CT

ICE

S -

FY

S

Mid-term Grades Are Reported To . . .(4-year institutions*)

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

Students

Advisors

Coaches

Central Office

Parents

Yes No Don't Know

* n = 634Source: Current Practices Survey 2002- Policy Center on the First Year of College

65%

65%

61%

63%

11%

CU

RR

EN

T P

RA

CT

ICE

S –

Ear

ly W

arni

ng

Special Attendance Policy for First-Year Students

7%

27%General Policy

66%No Policy

7% have a special policy on class attendance for 1st-year students

Source: 2001 Current Practices Survey (4-year institutions)CU

RR

EN

T P

RA

CT

ICE

S –

Ear

ly W

arni

ng

In the past five years has your institution studied the relationship of student class attendance to persistence, academic performance, or other outcomes?

Yes38% No

62%

* n = 956Source: Current Practices Survey 2002- Policy Center on the First Year of CollegeC

UR

RE

NT

PR

AC

TIC

ES

– E

arly

War

ning

Institutions of Excellence in the First College Year

Campuses submitted portfolios describing their first year initiatives

National panel selected the top 13 campuses based on 5 criteria

Criteria for Selection

#1 Evidence of an intentional, comprehensive approach to improving the first year that is appropriate to an institution’s type and mission

#2 Evidence of assessment of the various initiatives that constitute this approach

#3 Evidence of broad impact on significant numbers of first-year students, including, but not limited to, special student sub-populations

#4 Strong administrative support for first-year initiatives, evidence of institutionalization, and durability over time

#5 Involvement of a wide range of faculty, student affairs professionals, academic administrators, and other constituent groups.

Campus Visits

Teams visited each campus to learn how they became “excellent” at serving first-year students

Lessons Learned:

1. Most “excellent” programs took 10 years or more to build.

2. None started out with a holistic plan – they were built incrementally

3. Most had direct involvement of both faculty and the chief academic officer (CAO). Long serving CAOs were found at most institutions of excellence

Aspirational Model of the First College Year

designed by campuses

definitions of excellence

measures of achievement of each hallmark

externally validated

1. Approaches the first year in ways that are intentional, explicit, and based on clear philosophy/rationale for students’ first year.

2. Seeks to engage students in the collegiate experience both in and out of class.

3. Ensures that all first-year students encounter diverse ideas, viewpoints, and people.

Version 1.0

4. Serves all first-year students, including various segments of the first-year student population, according to their needs.

5. Has organizational structures and policies that provide a comprehensive, coordinated approach to the first year.

6. Uses a variety of quantitative and qualitative designs and methods to examine all aspects of students’ first-year experience and to evaluate and understand the impact of institutional policies, strategies, and interventions

Contact Information

Randy L. Swing

Policy Center on the First Year of College

[email protected]

http:www.brevard.edu/fyc