IPEDS: 216010 Note: The Major Field Report was formatted for printing. When viewing on screen in Excel, some content may appear truncated or oddly formatted. This is normal. Increasing the zoom level or viewing the report in Print Preview will improve on-screen display. The Major Field Report group 'Social Svc Professions' includes the following majors: Criminal justice; Criminology; Forensics; Justice administration; Law; Military science; Public administration, policy; Public safety and emergency management; Social work; Urban planning. Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania NSSE 2016 Major Field Report, Part II Comparisons to Other Institutions Social Svc Professions Comparing your students majoring in the fields shown below to those in the same fields at your comparison group institutions
32
Embed
Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania NSSE 2016 Major Field Report… · 2017. 11. 15. · SHIP The table below compares the percentageh of your students who participated in a High-Impact
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
IPEDS: 216010
Note: The Major Field Report was formatted for printing. When viewing on screen in Excel, some content may appear truncated or oddly formatted. This is normal. Increasing the zoom level or viewing the report in Print Preview will improve on-screen display.
The Major Field Report group 'Social Svc Professions' includes the following majors: Criminal justice; Criminology; Forensics; Justice administration; Law; Military science; Public administration, policy; Public safety and emergency management; Social work; Urban planning.
Shippensburg University of PennsylvaniaNSSE 2016 Major Field Report, Part II
Comparisons to Other InstitutionsSocial Svc Professions
Comparing your students majoring in the fields shown below to those in the same fields at your comparison group institutions
NSSE 2016 MAJOR FIELD REPORT, PART II • 2
About Your Major Field Report, Part II
Related-Major Groups
Sample
Class
Technical Requirements
Report Sections
Respondent Profile (pp. 45-51) Response frequencies for all demographic questions for your institution and your three core comparison groups.
Frequencies and Statistical Comparisons (pp. 9-44)
Response frequencies and statistical comparisons (including tests of significance and effect sizes) for all survey items except the demographics for your institution and your three core comparison groups.
NSSE 2016 Major Field Report, Part IIAbout This Report
High-Impact Practices (p. 8) Results on student participation in six High-Impact Practices (HIPs). See your High-Impact Practices report for more details.
Self-reported majors (first major given if two were reported) were identified from the survey. Your institution had the option to customize how these were grouped, using up to ten related-major groups. Institutions choosing not to customize their related-major groups receive NSSE's ten default groups. The majors used in this report are listed on the cover page of this report.
NSSE results included in MFR, Part II ● Engagement Indicators ● High-Impact Practices ● Frequencies and Statistical Comparisons ● Respondent Profile
Related-major groups with fewer than 20 respondents in a given class are not reported (columns are blank). Comparison groups must also contain at least 20 respondents in the major category, or they remain blank. Although 20 is a minimum requirement, keep in mind that any statistical result requires a sufficient number of respondents per group to produce a reliable estimate. Due to the disaggregation of results by student-reported major, the Major Field Report results are unweighted.
NSSE data serve to identify institutional strengths and weaknesses in reference to selected comparison institutions, yet institution-level comparisons may not capture important variation in student engagement that can be found within key subpopulations such as major. This report displays selected results for students at your institution and at your selected comparison institutions in the major category: Social Svc Professions.
This report is based on information from all randomly selected or census-administered students in the indicated group of majors for both your institution and your comparison institutions. Targeted and locally administered oversamples and other non-randomly selected students are not included.
Results are presented separately by institution-reported class level. Keep in mind that majors are student-reported. First-year students may report intended majors that have not yet been declared. Also, much of the first-year experience may take place outside of the major field. For these reasons, first-year results should be interpreted with caution.
Engagement Indicators (pp. 3-7) Results on NSSE's ten Engagement Indicators (EIs) organized into four themes. See your Engagement Indicators report for more details.
NSSE 2016 MAJOR FIELD REPORT, PART II • 3
Engagement Indicators: Overview
Use the following key:
▲ Your students’ average was significantly higher (p<.05) with an effect size at least .3 in magnitude.
△ Your students’ average was significantly higher (p<.05) with an effect size less than .3 in magnitude.
-- No significant difference.
▽ Your students’ average was significantly lower (p<.05) with an effect size less than .3 in magnitude.
▼ Your students’ average was significantly lower (p<.05) with an effect size at least .3 in magnitude.
Theme Engagement Indicator
Higher-Order Learning
Reflective & Integrative Learning
Learning Strategies
Quantitative Reasoning
Collaborative Learning
Discussions with Diverse Others
Student-Faculty Interaction
Effective Teaching Practices
Quality of Interactions
Supportive Environment
NSSE 2016 Major Field Report, Part II: Comparisons to Other InstitutionsOverview of Engagement Indicators: Social Svc Professions
Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania
Engagement Indicators are summary measures based on sets of NSSE questions examining key dimensions of student engagement. The ten indicators are organized within four themes: Academic Challenge, Learning with Peers, Experiences with Faculty, and Campus Environment. The tables below compare average scoresa for your students in this related-major category with students in your comparison groups within the same category.
First-Year Students in Social Svc Professions Seniors in Social Svc Professions
NSSE 2015 & 2016
Your first-year students compared with
Your first-year students compared with
Your first-year students compared with
Your seniors compared with
Your seniors compared with
Your seniors compared with
PASSHE Carnegie Class NSSE 2015 & 2016 PASSHE Carnegie Class
Academic Challenge
--
--
---- -- --
--
-- ---- -- --
Learning with Peers
-- ▲-- -- --
▲
Experiences with Faculty
-- ---- -- --
▲
Campus Environment
-- ---- -- --
--
NSSE 2016 MAJOR FIELD REPORT, PART II • 4
Seniorsa in Social Svc Professions
Mean SD b SEM c 5th 25th 50th 75th 95th Deg. of freedom eMean
First-Year Students in Social Svc Professions Seniors in Social Svc Professions
Statistical Comparisonsa
First-Year Students in Social Svc Professions %
11c. Learning community12. Service-learning
11e. Research with faculty
Participated in at least oneParticipated in two or more
Seniors in Social Svc Professions11c. Learning community 22 27 -.11 26 -.08 26 -.1012. Service-learning 89 74 .40 68 * .52 71 * .45
11e. Research with faculty 30 17 .29 16 .33 17 .3011a. Internship or field exp. 52 62 -.20 51 .02 54 -.0311d. Study abroad 0 6 -.48 8 -.56 9 -.6011f. Culminating senior exp. 63 39 * .49 41 * .45 42 * .43
Participated in at least one 93 88 .16 84 .27 86 .21Participated in two or more 70 68 .05 59 .24 62 .18
NSSE 2015 & 2016PASSHE Carnegie Class
Effect size j Effect size jEffect size j% i% i
SHIP
The table below compares the percentageh of your students who participated in a High-Impact Practice, including the percentage who participated overall (at least one, two or more), with those at institutions in your comparison groups.
NSSE 2016 Major Field Report, Part II: Comparisons to Other InstitutionsHigh-Impact Practices: Social Svc Professions
Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania
The figures below display the percentageh of students who participated in High-Impact Practices. Both figures include participation in a learning community, service-learning, and research with faculty. The Senior figure also includes participation in an internship or field experience, study abroad, and culminating senior experience. The first segment in each bar shows the percentage of students who participated in at least two HIPs, and the full bar (both colors) represents the percentage who participated in at least one.
% i
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
NSSE 2015 & 2016
Carnegie Class
PASSHE
SHIP
Participated in two or more HIPs Participated in one HIP
62%
59%
68%
70%
24%
25%
20%
22%
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
NSSE 2015 & 2016
Carnegie Class
PASSHE
SHIP
Participated in two or more HIPs Participated in one HIP
NSSE 2016 MAJOR FIELD REPORT, PART II • 7
Seniorsa in
SHIPItem wording or description
Variable name l Values m Response options Count % Count % Count % Count % Mean
Effect size n
Effect size n
Effect size n
1. During the current school year, about how often have you done the following?a. 1 Never 0 0 13 4 89 2 188 2
2 Sometimes 7 26 68 20 849 18 2,206 19
3 Often 8 30 121 35 1,411 29 3,529 30 3.2 3.1 .06 3.3 -.14 3.3 -.124 Very often 12 44 139 41 2,480 51 5,978 50
Total 27 100 341 100 4,829 100 11,901 100
b. 1 Never 7 26 84 25 823 17 2,036 17
2 Sometimes 10 37 105 31 1,536 32 3,846 33
3 Often 5 19 77 23 1,228 26 3,034 26 2.3 2.4 -.11 2.6 -.28 2.6 -.274 Very often 5 19 73 22 1,207 25 2,915 25
3 Often 9 35 85 25 1,094 23 2,683 23 2.5 2.4 .17 2.3 .30 2.3 .304 Very often 3 12 48 14 606 13 1,490 13
Total 26 100 338 100 4,784 100 11,787 100
4. During the current school year, how much has your coursework emphasized the following?a. 1 Very little 1 4 25 7 454 9 1,105 9
2 Some 7 26 98 29 1,525 32 3,762 32
3 Quite a bit 14 52 145 43 1,863 39 4,549 38 2.9 2.8 .09 2.7 .18 2.7 .174 Very much 5 19 72 21 961 20 2,424 20
Total 27 100 340 100 4,803 100 11,840 100
b. 1 Very little 0 0 3 1 92 2 239 2
2 Some 4 15 58 17 739 15 1,873 16
3 Quite a bit 17 63 139 41 2,008 42 4,965 42 3.1 3.2 -.20 3.2 -.19 3.2 -.174 Very much 6 22 139 41 1,966 41 4,736 40
Total 27 100 339 100 4,805 100 11,813 100
c. 1 Very little 0 0 7 2 119 2 300 3
2 Some 4 15 53 16 823 17 2,054 17
3 Quite a bit 19 70 150 45 1,945 41 4,884 41 3.0 3.2 -.24 3.2 -.22 3.2 -.204 Very much 4 15 127 38 1,912 40 4,551 39
Total 27 100 337 100 4,799 100 11,789 100
d. 1 Very little 0 0 7 2 103 2 274 2
2 Some 6 22 59 17 791 17 1,959 17
3 Quite a bit 14 52 152 45 2,037 42 4,996 42 3.0 3.1 -.14 3.2 -.18 3.2 -.184 Very much 7 26 121 36 1,862 39 4,566 39
Total 27 100 339 100 4,793 100 11,795 100
Discussed course topics, ideas, or concepts with a faculty member outside of class
SFdiscuss
Discussed your academic performance with a faculty member
SFperform
Memorizing course material
memorize
Applying facts, theories, or methods to practical problems or new situations
HOapply
Analyzing an idea, experience, or line of reasoning in depth by examining its parts
HOanalyze
Evaluating a point of view, decision, or information source
HOevaluate
NSSE 2016 MAJOR FIELD REPORT, PART II • 11
Seniorsa in
SHIPItem wording or description
Variable name l Values m Response options Count % Count % Count % Count % Mean
Effect size n
Effect size n
Effect size n
Carnegie Class NSSE 2015 & 2016
Your seniors compared with
Frequency Distributions Statistical Comparisonsk
SHIP PASSHE Carnegie ClassNSSE 2015 &
2016 PASSHE
Mean Mean Mean
NSSE 2016 Major Field Report, Part II: Comparisons to Other Institutions
Shippensburg University of PennsylvaniaFrequencies and Statistical Comparisons: Social Svc Professions
Social Svc Professions
e. 1 Very little 0 0 6 2 121 3 339 3
2 Some 8 30 77 23 933 19 2,328 20
3 Quite a bit 12 44 142 42 2,077 43 5,067 43 3.0 3.1 -.14 3.1 -.17 3.1 -.164 Very much 7 26 114 34 1,661 35 4,053 34
Total 27 100 339 100 4,792 100 11,787 100
5. During the current school year, to what extent have your instructors done the following?a. 1 Very little 0 0 5 1 91 2 211 2
2 Some 5 19 40 12 618 13 1,684 14
3 Quite a bit 13 48 139 41 1,852 38 4,622 39 3.1 3.3 -.23 3.3 -.20 3.3 -.164 Very much 9 33 157 46 2,258 47 5,361 45
Total 27 100 341 100 4,819 100 11,878 100
b. 1 Very little 0 0 5 1 135 3 368 3
2 Some 6 22 45 13 667 14 1,796 15
3 Quite a bit 11 41 151 45 1,904 40 4,676 40 3.1 3.2 -.13 3.2 -.12 3.2 -.074 Very much 10 37 138 41 2,098 44 4,996 42
Total 27 100 339 100 4,804 100 11,836 100
c. 1 Very little 1 4 8 2 170 4 406 3
2 Some 3 11 43 13 772 16 2,013 17
3 Quite a bit 10 37 136 40 1,744 36 4,319 37 3.3 3.3 .03 3.2 .11 3.2 .134 Very much 13 48 150 45 2,112 44 5,081 43
Total 27 100 337 100 4,798 100 11,819 100
d. 1 Very little 1 4 20 6 383 8 998 8
2 Some 5 19 89 26 1,123 23 2,814 24
3 Quite a bit 9 33 118 35 1,477 31 3,738 32 3.2 2.9 .26 3.0 .21 3.0 .244 Very much 12 44 112 33 1,817 38 4,275 36
Total 27 100 339 100 4,800 100 11,825 100
e. 1 Very little 0 0 15 4 296 6 764 6
2 Some 8 30 75 22 1,050 22 2,735 23
3 Quite a bit 9 33 132 39 1,697 35 4,184 36 3.1 3.0 .05 3.0 .06 3.0 .104 Very much 10 37 115 34 1,739 36 4,099 35
Total 27 100 337 100 4,782 100 11,782 100
Forming a new idea or understanding from various pieces of information
HOform
Clearly explained course goals and requirements
ETgoals
Taught course sessions in an organized way
ETorganize
Used examples or illustrations to explain difficult points
ETexample
Provided feedback on a draft or work in progress
ETdraftfb
Provided prompt and detailed feedback on tests or completed assignments
ETfeedback
NSSE 2016 MAJOR FIELD REPORT, PART II • 12
Seniorsa in
SHIPItem wording or description
Variable name l Values m Response options Count % Count % Count % Count % Mean
Effect size n
Effect size n
Effect size n
Carnegie Class NSSE 2015 & 2016
Your seniors compared with
Frequency Distributions Statistical Comparisonsk
SHIP PASSHE Carnegie ClassNSSE 2015 &
2016 PASSHE
Mean Mean Mean
NSSE 2016 Major Field Report, Part II: Comparisons to Other Institutions
Shippensburg University of PennsylvaniaFrequencies and Statistical Comparisons: Social Svc Professions
Social Svc Professions
6. During the current school year, about how often have you done the following?a. 1 Never 1 4 46 13 654 14 1,648 14
2 Sometimes 13 48 143 42 1,761 36 4,468 383 Often 9 33 86 25 1,580 33 3,797 32 2.6 2.5 .09 2.5 .06 2.5 .094 Very often 4 15 66 19 833 17 1,970 17
Total 27 100 341 100 4,828 100 11,883 100b. 1 Never 2 7 52 15 776 16 1,872 16
2 Sometimes 13 48 139 41 1,819 38 4,589 39
3 Often 8 30 95 28 1,447 30 3,518 30 2.5 2.4 .09 2.5 .06 2.5 .074 Very often 4 15 53 16 774 16 1,878 16
Total 27 100 339 100 4,816 100 11,857 100
c. 1 Never 3 12 59 17 844 18 2,080 182 Sometimes 12 48 136 40 1,919 40 4,769 403 Often 8 32 84 25 1,344 28 3,322 28 2.4 2.4 -.07 2.4 -.04 2.4 -.034 Very often 2 8 61 18 701 15 1,671 14
Total 25 100 340 100 4,808 100 11,842 100
7. During the current school year, about how many papers, reports, or other writing tasks of the following length have you been assigned? (Include those not yet completed.)a. 0 None 1 4 13 4 116 3 325 3
11. Which of the following have you done or do you plan to do before you graduate?o
a. Have not decided 2 7 13 4 467 10 996 8
Do not plan to do 4 15 48 14 845 18 1,966 17
Plan to do 7 26 69 20 1,053 22 2,549 21 52% 62% -.20 51% .02 54% -.03Done or in progress 14 52 211 62 2,452 51 6,356 54
Total 27 100 341 100 4,817 100 11,867 100
Identified key information from reading assignments
LSreading
Reviewed your notes after class
LSnotes
Summarized what you learned in class or from course materials
LSsummary
challenge
Participate in an internship, co-op, field experience, student teaching, or clinical placement
intern
(Means indicate the percentage who responded
"Done or in progress.")
NSSE 2016 MAJOR FIELD REPORT, PART II • 15
Seniorsa in
SHIPItem wording or description
Variable name l Values m Response options Count % Count % Count % Count % Mean
Effect size n
Effect size n
Effect size n
Carnegie Class NSSE 2015 & 2016
Your seniors compared with
Frequency Distributions Statistical Comparisonsk
SHIP PASSHE Carnegie ClassNSSE 2015 &
2016 PASSHE
Mean Mean Mean
NSSE 2016 Major Field Report, Part II: Comparisons to Other Institutions
Shippensburg University of PennsylvaniaFrequencies and Statistical Comparisons: Social Svc Professions
Social Svc Professions
b. Have not decided 4 15 40 12 655 14 1,535 13
Do not plan to do 6 22 154 45 2,375 49 5,759 49
Plan to do 4 15 29 9 398 8 993 8 48% 35% .28 29% * .40 30% * .37Done or in progress 13 48 118 35 1,381 29 3,558 30 ▲ ▲Total 27 100 341 100 4,809 100 11,845 100
c. Have not decided 4 15 36 11 739 15 1,748 15
Do not plan to do 13 48 176 52 2,345 49 5,783 49
Plan to do 4 15 36 11 477 10 1,168 10 22% 27% -.11 26% -.08 26% -.10Done or in progress 6 22 92 27 1,219 26 3,108 26
Total 27 100 340 100 4,780 100 11,807 100
d. Have not decided 4 15 37 11 686 14 1,645 14
Do not plan to do 19 70 263 78 3,403 71 8,312 70
Plan to do 4 15 19 6 342 7 852 7 0% 6% -.48 8% -.56 9% -.60Done or in progress 0 0 19 6 365 8 1,018 9
Total 27 100 338 100 4,796 100 11,827 100
e. Have not decided 5 19 54 16 872 18 2,101 18
Do not plan to do 10 37 183 54 2,545 53 6,249 53
Plan to do 4 15 43 13 606 13 1,406 12 30% 17% .29 16% .33 17% .30Done or in progress 8 30 59 17 763 16 2,026 17
Total 27 100 339 100 4,786 100 11,782 100
f. Have not decided 1 4 42 12 551 11 1,390 12
Do not plan to do 2 7 113 33 1,082 23 2,814 24
Plan to do 7 26 54 16 1,213 25 2,666 23 63% 39% * .49 41% * .45 42% * .43Done or in progress 17 63 132 39 1,950 41 4,947 42 ▲ ▲ ▲Total 27 100 341 100 4,796 100 11,817 100
12. About how many of your courses at this institution have included a community-based project (service-learning)?1 None 3 11 90 26 1,528 32 3,385 292 Some 15 56 165 49 2,371 49 6,022 513 Most 7 26 78 23 763 16 2,034 17 2.3 2.0 .38 1.9 ** .52 2.0 * .454 All 2 7 7 2 143 3 395 3 ▲ ▲
Total 27 100 340 100 4,805 100 11,836 100
Hold a formal leadership role in a student organization or group
leader
(Means indicate the percentage who responded
"Done or in progress.")
Participate in a learning community or some other formal program where groups of students take two or more classes together
learncom
(Means indicate the percentage who responded
"Done or in progress.")
Participate in a study abroad program
abroad
(Means indicate the percentage who responded
"Done or in progress.")
Work with a faculty member on a research project
research
(Means indicate the percentage who responded
"Done or in progress.")
Complete a culminating senior experience (capstone course, senior project or thesis, comprehensive exam, portfolio, etc.)
capstone
(Means indicate the percentage who responded
"Done or in progress.")
servcourse
NSSE 2016 MAJOR FIELD REPORT, PART II • 16
Seniorsa in
SHIPItem wording or description
Variable name l Values m Response options Count % Count % Count % Count % Mean
Effect size n
Effect size n
Effect size n
Carnegie Class NSSE 2015 & 2016
Your seniors compared with
Frequency Distributions Statistical Comparisonsk
SHIP PASSHE Carnegie ClassNSSE 2015 &
2016 PASSHE
Mean Mean Mean
NSSE 2016 Major Field Report, Part II: Comparisons to Other Institutions
Shippensburg University of PennsylvaniaFrequencies and Statistical Comparisons: Social Svc Professions
Social Svc Professions
13. Indicate the quality of your interactions with the following people at your institution.a. 1 Poor 1 4 4 1 63 1 146 1
Providing care for dependents (children, parents, etc.)
tmcarehrs
(Recoded version of tmcare created by NSSE. Values
are estimated number of hours
per week.)
Commuting to campus (driving, walking, etc.)
tmcommutehrs
(Recoded version of tmcommute
created by NSSE. Values are
estimated number of hours per
week.)
reading
(Revised for 2014. Comparison data
are limited to NSSE 2014
participating institutions.)
(Continuous variable created by NSSE. Calculated as a proportion of tmprephrs based on reading, where Very little=.10; Some=.25;
About half=.50; Most=.75; Almost all=.90)
NSSE 2016 MAJOR FIELD REPORT, PART II • 22
Seniorsa in
SHIPItem wording or description
Variable name l Values m Response options Count % Count % Count % Count % Mean
Effect size n
Effect size n
Effect size n
Carnegie Class NSSE 2015 & 2016
Your seniors compared with
Frequency Distributions Statistical Comparisonsk
SHIP PASSHE Carnegie ClassNSSE 2015 &
2016 PASSHE
Mean Mean Mean
NSSE 2016 Major Field Report, Part II: Comparisons to Other Institutions
Shippensburg University of PennsylvaniaFrequencies and Statistical Comparisons: Social Svc Professions
Social Svc Professions
1 0 hrs 0 0 0 0 31 1 61 1
2More than zero, up to 5 hrs 14 52 191 56 2,199 46 5,422 46
3More than 5, up to 10 hrs 10 37 89 26 1,452 30 3,576 30
4More than 10, up to 15 hrs 0 0 37 11 520 11 1,265 11
5More than 15, up to 20 hrs 2 7 8 2 283 6 688 6
6More than 20, up to 25 hrs 1 4 10 3 201 4 518 4
7 More than 25 hrs 0 0 4 1 97 2 248 2
Total 27 100 339 100 4,783 100 11,778 100
17. How much has your experience at this institution contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in the following areas?a. 1 Very little 0 0 6 2 160 3 418 4
2 Some 4 15 54 16 712 15 1,813 15
3 Quite a bit 14 52 136 40 1,737 36 4,339 37 3.2 3.2 -.06 3.2 -.07 3.2 -.054 Very much 9 33 145 43 2,207 46 5,309 45
Total 27 100 341 100 4,816 100 11,879 100
b. 1 Very little 0 0 11 3 327 7 781 7
2 Some 5 19 61 18 899 19 2,264 19
3 Quite a bit 13 48 146 43 1,715 36 4,310 36 3.1 3.1 .04 3.1 .09 3.1 .104 Very much 9 33 122 36 1,865 39 4,481 38
Total 27 100 340 100 4,806 100 11,836 100
c. 1 Very little 0 0 7 2 102 2 254 2
2 Some 3 11 43 13 516 11 1,294 11
3 Quite a bit 16 59 125 37 1,681 35 4,197 36 3.2 3.3 -.17 3.4 -.24 3.4 -.234 Very much 8 30 164 48 2,494 52 6,077 51
Total 27 100 339 100 4,793 100 11,822 100
d. 1 Very little 0 0 41 12 528 11 1,244 11
2 Some 11 41 117 35 1,433 30 3,579 30
3 Quite a bit 13 48 108 32 1,517 32 3,811 32 2.7 2.6 .08 2.8 -.05 2.8 -.064 Very much 3 11 73 22 1,318 27 3,197 27
Total 27 100 339 100 4,796 100 11,831 100
Writing clearly and effectively
pgwrite
tmreadinghrscol
(Collapsed version of tmreadinghrs
created by NSSE.)
Speaking clearly and effectively
pgspeak
Thinking critically and analytically
pgthink
Analyzing numerical and statistical information
pganalyze
NSSE 2016 MAJOR FIELD REPORT, PART II • 23
Seniorsa in
SHIPItem wording or description
Variable name l Values m Response options Count % Count % Count % Count % Mean
Effect size n
Effect size n
Effect size n
Carnegie Class NSSE 2015 & 2016
Your seniors compared with
Frequency Distributions Statistical Comparisonsk
SHIP PASSHE Carnegie ClassNSSE 2015 &
2016 PASSHE
Mean Mean Mean
NSSE 2016 Major Field Report, Part II: Comparisons to Other Institutions
Shippensburg University of PennsylvaniaFrequencies and Statistical Comparisons: Social Svc Professions
Social Svc Professions
e. 1 Very little 1 4 23 7 351 7 922 8
2 Some 4 15 66 20 937 19 2,349 20
3 Quite a bit 12 44 118 35 1,596 33 3,937 33 3.1 3.1 .10 3.1 .10 3.0 .124 Very much 10 37 131 39 1,922 40 4,641 39
Total 27 100 338 100 4,806 100 11,849 100
f. 1 Very little 0 0 11 3 266 6 626 5
2 Some 4 15 53 16 955 20 2,327 20
3 Quite a bit 11 41 136 40 1,644 34 4,100 35 3.3 3.2 .14 3.1 .23 3.1 .224 Very much 12 44 137 41 1,922 40 4,758 40
Total 27 100 337 100 4,787 100 11,811 100
g. 1 Very little 0 0 15 4 371 8 918 8
2 Some 3 11 65 19 893 19 2,137 18
3 Quite a bit 12 44 94 28 1,447 30 3,680 31 3.3 3.2 .14 3.1 .25 3.1 .254 Very much 12 44 165 49 2,097 44 5,110 43
Total 27 100 339 100 4,808 100 11,845 100
h. 1 Very little 1 4 15 4 320 7 751 6
2 Some 3 11 71 21 931 19 2,247 19
3 Quite a bit 10 37 113 33 1,487 31 3,752 32 3.3 3.1 .20 3.1 .21 3.1 .204 Very much 13 48 142 42 2,065 43 5,097 43
Total 27 100 341 100 4,803 100 11,847 100
i. 1 Very little 1 4 20 6 362 8 875 7
2 Some 4 15 74 22 1,024 21 2,562 22
3 Quite a bit 12 44 125 37 1,687 35 4,201 36 3.1 3.0 .14 3.0 .16 3.0 .174 Very much 10 37 122 36 1,728 36 4,191 35
Total 27 100 341 100 4,801 100 11,829 100
j. 1 Very little 0 0 23 7 374 8 928 8
2 Some 7 27 79 23 1,023 21 2,513 21
3 Quite a bit 12 46 122 36 1,583 33 3,969 34 3.0 3.0 .03 3.0 -.01 3.0 .004 Very much 7 27 116 34 1,802 38 4,370 37
Total 26 100 340 100 4,782 100 11,780 100
pgprobsolve
Being an informed and active citizen
pgcitizen
Acquiring job- or work-related knowledge and skills
pgwork
Working effectively with others
pgothers
Developing or clarifying a personal code of values and ethics
pgvalues
Understanding people of other backgrounds (economic, racial/ethnic, political, religious, nationality, etc.)
pgdiverse
Solving complex real-world problems
NSSE 2016 MAJOR FIELD REPORT, PART II • 24
Seniorsa in
SHIPItem wording or description
Variable name l Values m Response options Count % Count % Count % Count % Mean
Effect size n
Effect size n
Effect size n
Carnegie Class NSSE 2015 & 2016
Your seniors compared with
Frequency Distributions Statistical Comparisonsk
SHIP PASSHE Carnegie ClassNSSE 2015 &
2016 PASSHE
Mean Mean Mean
NSSE 2016 Major Field Report, Part II: Comparisons to Other Institutions
Shippensburg University of PennsylvaniaFrequencies and Statistical Comparisons: Social Svc Professions
Social Svc Professions
18. How would you evaluate your entire educational experience at this institution?1 Poor 0 0 3 1 91 2 220 2
26. attend_voc Vocational or technical school 1 4 16 5 517 11 1,355 11attend_com Community or junior college 8 30 123 36 2,519 52 6,146 52attend_col 4-year college or university
Since graduating from high school, which of the following types of schools have you attended other than the one you are now attending? (Select all that apply.)
What is the highest level of education you ever expect to complete?
edaspire
What have most of your grades been up to now at this institution?
grades
Did you begin college at this institution or elsewhere?
NSSE 2016 Major Field Report, Part II: Comparisons to Other InstitutionsRespondent Profile: Social Svc Professions
Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania
PASSHE Carnegie ClassNSSE 2015 &
2016
28. Did not finish high school 0 0 11 3 469 10 1,141 10High school diploma or G.E.D. 6 22 113 33 1,355 28 3,248 27Attended college, but did not complete degree
International student country of citizenship, collapsed into regions by NSSE. Responses to country are in the data file. U.S. (domestic) students did not receive this question.
countrycol
(Recoded from country.)
parentedWhat is the highest level of education completed by either of your parents (or those who raised you)?
What is your gender identity?
genderid
Enter your year of birth (e.g., 1994):
agecat
(Recoded from the information entered in birthyear)
First-generation status (No parent holds a bachelor's degree)
Two or more races/ethnicities 1 4 10 3 110 2 295 3
Unknown 0 0 4 1 196 4 512 5
Total 27 100 341 100 4,522 100 10,960 100
Freshman/First-Year 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sophomore 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Junior 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Senior 27 100 341 100 4,844 100 11,938 100
Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 27 100 341 100 4,844 100 11,938 100
No 27 100 341 100 4,789 99 11,844 99
Yes 0 0 0 0 55 1 94 1
Total 27 100 341 100 4,844 100 11,938 100
Not full-time 4 15 47 14 1,112 23 2,557 21
Full-time 23 85 294 86 3,732 77 9,381 79
Total 27 100 341 100 4,844 100 11,938 100
Institution-reportedfirst-time first-year (FTFY) status
IRftfy
Institution-reported enrollment status
IRenrollment
Institution-reported sex IRsex
Institution-reported race or ethnicity
IRrace
Institution-reported class level
IRclass
Institution-reported information (Variables provided by your institution in your NSSE population file.)
NSSE 2016 MAJOR FIELD REPORT, PART II • 32
Endnotesa.
b. Standard deviation is a measure of the amount the individual scores deviate from the mean of all the scores in the distribution.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
l.
m.
n.
o.
Key to symbols:
▲ Your students’ average was significantly higher (p < .05) with an effect size at least .3 in magnitude.
△ Your students’ average was significantly higher (p < .05) with an effect size less than .3 in magnitude.
▽ Your students’ average was significantly lower (p < .05) with an effect size less than .3 in magnitude.
▼ Your students’ average was significantly lower (p < .05) with an effect size at least .3 in magnitude.
Reference: Rocconi, L., & Gonyea, R. M. (2015). Contextualizing student engagement effect sizes: An empirical analysis. Paper presented at the Association for Institutional Research Annual Forum, Denver, CO.
These are the values used to calculate means. For the majority of items, these values match the codes in the data file and codebook. For items estimating number of papers and hours per week, the values represent actual units using the midpoints of response option ranges and an estimate for unbounded options.
Effect size for independent t -tests uses Cohen's d; z -tests use Cohen's h.
All results are unweighted.
Means calculated from ordered response options (e.g., Very Often, Often, Sometimes, Never) assume equal intervals and should be interpreted with caution. Unless otherwise noted, statistical comparisons are two-tailed independent t-tests. Exceptions are the dichotomous high-impact practice items (11a to 11f) which are compared using a z-test.
Items that make up the Engagement Indicators include the following two-letter prefixes: CL = Collaborative Learning, DD = Discussions with Diverse Others, ET = Effective Teaching Practices, HO = Higher-Order Learning, LS = Learning Strategies, QI = Quality of Interactions, QR = Quantitative Reasoning, RI = Reflective and Integrative Learning, SE = Supportive Environment, and SF = Student-Faculty Interaction.
Percentage of students who responded "Done or in progress" except for service-learning which is the percentage who responded that at least "Some" courses included a community-based project.
Cohen's h: The standardized difference between two proportions. Effect size indicates the practical importance of an observed difference. NSSE research has found that interpretations vary by HIP: For service-learning, internships, study abroad, and culminating senior experiences, an effect size of about .2 may be considered small, .5 medium, and .8 large. For learning community and research with faculty, an effect size of about .1 may be considered small, .3 medium, and .5 large (Rocconi & Gonyea, 2015).
Standard error of the mean, used to compute a confidence interval (CI) around the sample mean. For example, the 95% CI is the range of values that is 95% likely to contain the true population mean, equal to the sample mean +/- 1.96 * SEM.
A percentile is the point in the distribution of student-level EI scores at or below which a given percentage of EI scores fall.
Degrees of freedom used to compute the t -tests. Values differ from Ns due to whether equal variances were assumed.
Statistical significance represents the probability that the difference between the mean of your institution and that of the comparison group occurred by chance: *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001 (2-tailed).
Cohen's d: The mean difference divided by the pooled standard deviation. Effect size indicates the practical importance of an observed difference. For EI comparisons, NSSE research has concluded that an effect size of about .1 may be considered small, .3 medium, and .5 large (Rocconi & Gonyea, 2015). Comparisons with an effect size of at least .3 in magnitude (before rounding) are highlighted in the Overview.
Statistical comparison uses z -test to compare the percentage who responded "Done or in progress."
Note: It is important to interpret the direction of differences relative to item wording and your institutional context.
NSSE 2016 Major Field Report, Part II: Comparisons to Other InstitutionsEndnotes: Social Svc Professions