EAB Faculty Role in Student Success SHSU 10-04-16 PDF

The Faculty Role in Student
Success
Lessons from EABs Latest Research
David Attis
dattis@eab.com
2015 The Advisory Board Company eab.com
ROAD MAP
The Data Challenge Behind Student Success
Engaging Faculty in Student Success
Redirecting Resources to Enhance Student Success
Why Dont Students Complete?
Causes of Attrition Only Too Familiar
Thousands of pages of
task force
recommendations
Hundreds of new
student success
administrators
Hours spent in
campus meetings and
town halls
Countless
presentations on
improving completion
In my interviews with students, I

have found that the biggest
reasons for a delay in graduation
are that students switch majors,
fail out of courses, cannot get
required courses, do not qualify
for their intended majors; they
have to work to pay for their
living expenses, do not think
there are any jobs for them
after graduation, pursue double
majors, do not receive
adequate advising, have
medical problems and personal
issues.
Faculty Member,
Large Public Research University
The Data Challenges Underlying Student Success

Too Many Students Slipping through the Cracks
The Ideal:
Dedicated
High-Touch Care
Coordinated
Support Network
Case Management
and Tracking System
+ Early Identification
+ Academic support
+ Appointment nudges
+ Careful monitoring
+ Financial support
+ Referrer notifications
+ Proactive care
+ Social services
+ Shared records
Reality:
We Make Tradeoffs
Reality:
We Arent Coordinated
Reality:
We Dont Close the Loop
Advisors cannot fully care

for high-risk students while
still serving all others
Referrals done manually,

support services rarely
collaborate around cases
Students set their own

appointments, referrers are
rarely notified of outcomes
Where Better Data Can Help
Large Numbers of Murky Middle Students Leaving Later in College

Histogram of All Students by First-Year GPA
SSC National Data Set (650,000 Students)
90 K
The Murky Middle
a second year
Continued Enrollees Past 6 Years (29,826 students)
48% graduate
80 K
Number of Students
70 K
60 K
84% return for
Graduates within 6 Years (357,405 students)
within six years
2nd to 6th Year Departures (183,827 students)

1st Year Departures (167,697 students)
50 K
40 K
30 K
20 K
10 K
0K
0.0 - 0.2 - 0.4 - 0.6 - 0.8 - 1.0 - 1.2 - 1.4 - 1.6 - 1.8 - 2.0 - 2.2 - 2.4 - 2.6 - 2.8 - 3.0 - 3.2 - 3.4 - 3.6 - 3.8 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0
First-Year GPA
Source: EAB Murky Middle Project: http://www.eab.com/technology/studentsuccess-collaborative/members/white-papers/the-murky-middle-project
Is This What Rising Risk Looks Like?
Murky Middle GPA Trends Foreshadow Departure Several Terms in Advance

3.5
Murky Middle Term GPA Trends Over Time

Students With First-Year GPA 2.0 to 3.0
Term 8
Term 11
grads Term 9 Term 10
grads
grads
grads
Term 12
grads
Average Term GPA
3.0
1
Problems appear
well in advance
of attrition
2
2.5
2.0
1.5
Trends cut across

demographics
and programs
Academic
Probation
Term 8
dropouts
Term 10
Term 9 dropouts
Term 12
dropouts
Term 4
dropouts
dropouts
Term 11
Term 6
dropouts
dropouts
Term 7
Term 3
dropouts
dropouts
Term 5
dropouts
3
What other key
indicators should
we monitor?
Source: EAB research and data nalysis.
We Need to Be Looking at Different Metrics

Outcome Metrics Reveal Performance, But Dont Help You Improve
How the Metrics Roll Up
The Challenge is Knowing What Works
With our retention strategies, were really just throwing
everything at the wall and hoping something sticks. Thats
just not the way to do it. If something did stick, we wouldnt
even know which one did or why.
Four-year graduation
Sara Rosen, Senior Vice Provost

University of Kansas
Persistence
Data We Need
Real-time, granular, process-oriented
Real-time student
performance
Attendance
Grades
Support service
interaction
# advising interactions
Tutoring appointments
Process
completion
Registration
FAFSA completion
Interim
outcomes
Term-to-term persistence
Term GPA change
Registration
2.2
Term GPA
Exam grades
Class attendance
ROAD MAP
Six Roles for Faculty in Student Success
Individual and Collective Responsibilities to Guide Institutional Change
1
Collective
DecisionMaking
Considering student success

in each stage of curricular
decision-making
4
Individual
Contribution
Remove Curricular
Barriers to Completion
Enhance the
Learning Experience
Evaluating and scaling

high-impact learning
innovations across courses
and disciplines
Sustaining Momentum
Through Structured
Accountability and Incentives
Redesign
Academic Policies
Garnering support for

student-facing rule
changes that promote
persistence to degree
Flag Signs of
Student Risk
Equipping faculty with

the right tools and
techniques to maximize
early warning systems
Support Evolving
Advising Models
Building buy-in for,

confidence in, and
collaboration with central and
professional advising staff
Mentor Rising-Risk
Student Groups
Targeting faculty
engagement efforts toward
students lacking a strong
connection to campus
Determining the right metrics, organizational structures, and

incentives to encourage improvement among central administrators,
deans, department chairs, and frontline faculty
10
1
Collective
DecisionMaking
Individual
Contribution
1.
Remove Curricular
DIY Enrollment Analysis
Platform
2.
Enrollment Impact Audits
3.
Task-Based Retention Teams
4.
Guided Project Management
Enhance the
Learning Experience
Scaling Learning Innovations
2
5.
Redesign
Academic Policies
Academic Policy Audit
Flag Signs of
Student Risk
Support Evolving
Advising Models
6.
Faculty-Led Advisor Training
7.
Advising Career Ladder
8.
Unit Liaison Roles
9.
Distributed Support Balancing
Mentor Rising-Risk
Student Groups
10. Early Warning Design

Requirements
13. Targeted First-Year

Mentor Matching
11. Adjustable Alert

Parameters
14. High-Flyer Transfer

Intervention
12. Effectiveness-Focused
Feedback
Sustaining Momentum
Through Structured
15. Leadership
Scorecards
16. PerformanceBased Bonus

Funding
17. Departmental
Performance
Dashboard
Remove Curricular Barriers to Completion
Where Curricular Planning Breaks Down
11
Both Faculty Incentives and Reform Mechanisms Block Progress
Departmental decisions
ignore impact on progression
Desire to ensure
quality of students
admitted to major
Belief that 2-year

institutions programs
lack required rigor
Committees and taskforces

falter over time
Desire to be
inclusive and build
broad consensus
Emphasis on open
experimentation and
small-scale pilots
Unintended results harm students progress to graduation

Overly strict requirements
force students into lastminute major changes
Transfers from community

colleges have to retake
classes or undergo slow,
case-by-case audits
Meetings focused more on

discussion than decision;
limited capacity for
analysis or technical
implementation support
New initiatives or changes

never scale beyond initial
enthusiasts; limited
funding to sustain effort
Source: EAB interviews and analysis.
Practice #2: Enrollment Impact Audits
Guardrails on Curricular Changes
12
Strategic Enrollment Management Analyses Check Faculty Assumptions
Units and programs propose curricular changes

Encouraged to conduct self-analysis of progression
impact and strategic alignment, but often lack
resources or expertise to rigorously vet proposals
1
3
Enrollment Manager analyzes claims and

simulates impact of changes
Vice Provost for Strategic Enrollment Management

runs longitudinal analyses to test assumptions
No veto power, but strong buy-in from provost and
deans council to influence decisions
Curriculum committee and deans view final report

Recommendations include analyses conducted by
enrollment management office
Traditional approval process keeps faculty in control
13
1
Collective
DecisionMaking
Individual
Contribution
1.
Remove Curricular
Platform
2.
3.
4.
Enhance the
Learning Experience
Scaling Learning Innovations:
2
5.
Redesign
Academic Policies
Flag Signs of
Student Risk
Support Evolving
Advising Models
6.
7.
8.
Unit Liaison Roles
9.
Mentor Rising-Risk
Student Groups

Requirements

Mentor Matching

Parameters

Intervention
Feedback
Sustaining Momentum
Through Structured
15. Leadership
Scorecards

Funding
17. Departmental
Performance
Dashboard
Redesign Academic Policies
Faculty Influence Extends Beyond the Curriculum
14
Policy Decisions Have Direct and Indirect Effects on Student Progression
Course Planning
Withdrawal Process
Registration Holds
Enrollment Status
Departments plan
sections one term at
a time, limiting longterm planning
Easy Yes/No prompt for

course or institutional
withdrawal leads to poor
student decisions
Small, unpaid bursar

fees lead to hundreds
of stop-outs after
registration hold
Many students take light

course loads without
anticipating impact on
time-to-degree
Progression-informed policy change
Multi-term scheduling
Withdrawal surveys
Emergency Grants
Redefine Full Time
Annual course planning

period enables full-year
course registration for
students
Automated advising
prompts walk students
through consequences
and campus resources
Students missing fee

payments proactively
counseled and assisted
in exceptional cases
Students advised to take

at least 30 credits per
year unless they face
serious conflicts
3% retention gain at
Cleveland State
University
40% of students
starting survey
retained at Penn State
5-8% retention gain

at Xavier University
Higher course loads

led to higher GPAs
and grad rates at
University of Hawaii
Practice #5: Academic Policy Audit (Forthcoming Resource)
Supporting Reexamination on Your Campus
15
New Policy Audit Toolkit to Accelerate Revision Efforts
1
1.
Policies Every
Institution Should
Change
Add course withdrawal
advising prompt
2.
Plan for multi-term registration
3.
Enable section waitlists in

scheduling system
Calibrating Rules
to Student Need
1.
Academic probation terms
2.
Major declaration timeframe
3.
Graduation requirements
4.
Registration holds
Critical Analyses to
Identify Barriers
1.
Identifying major milestone

courses and grade thresholds
2.
Coordinating pre-requisites
and course sequencing
3.
Transfer success trends
10. And more
10. And more
10. And more
Example Guide:
Example Guide:
Example Guide:
Re-enrollment campaigns
Bursar hold resolution rules
Demand-based course scheduling
Identifying and prioritizing

non-registrants
Setting acceptable range for

forgiving and assisting with
unpaid balances
Guide to seat utilization analysis
Outreach scripts and templates

Decision rules for escalating rerecruitment methods
Streamlining re-admission
Financial literacy and

counseling practices
FAFSA education and
compliance campaigns
Best practices and incentives for

encouraging efficient space use
Using historical trends and realtime registration data to
optimize section planning
16
1
Collective
DecisionMaking
Individual
Contribution
1.
Remove Curricular
Platform
2.
3.
4.
Enhance the
Learning Experience
2
5.
Redesign
Academic Policies
Flag Signs of
Student Risk
Support Evolving
Advising Models
6.
7.
8.
Unit Liaison Roles
9.
Mentor Rising-Risk
Student Groups

Requirements

Mentor Matching

Parameters

Intervention
Feedback
Sustaining Momentum
Through Structured
15. Leadership
Scorecards

Funding
17. Departmental
Performance
Dashboard
Unbundling the Advising Process
17
Complex
Dozens of Discrete Problems Require Variety of Roles on Campus
Success Coaches
I dont fit in and Im
stressed at work
I cant afford to
finish my degree
How many courses

should I take?
Transactional
Faculty
I need a new
ID card
Which subfield
should I study?
I want to
switch majors
I need to
pick a major
I need to register
for classes
Academic
Advisors
Self-Service
Non-Academic
Academic
18
1
Collective
DecisionMaking
Individual
Contribution
1.
Remove Curricular
Platform
2.
3.
4.
Enhance the
Learning Experience
2
5.
Redesign
Academic Policies
Flag Signs of
Student Risk
Support Evolving
Advising Models
6.
7.
8.
Unit Liaison Roles
9.
Mentor Rising-Risk
Student Groups

Requirements

Mentor Matching

Parameters

Intervention
Feedback
Sustaining Momentum
Through Structured
15. Leadership
Scorecards

Funding
17. Departmental
Performance
Dashboard
Despite Growing Comfort, Hesitation Remains
19
Most Faculty Familiar with Innovations, But Avoid Trying Them Out
A Growing Comfort with
Tech-Enhanced Teaching
60%
78%
Of faculty say
the LMS
is a critical tool
to their
teaching
Of faculty have
a growing
interest in
using tech in
teaching
A Form of Empowerment
Faculty are starting to see
their own embrace of
technology as a form of
empowerment.
Matthew Rascoff,
University of North Carolina
Professors Know About High-Tech Teaching

Methods, but Few Use Them
Not
Familiar
Familiar but
havent tried
Tried
Adopted
Clickers and
other real-time
feedback
11%
64%
10%
12%
Interdisciplinary
team-teaching
13%
63%
12%
10%
Hybrid courses
8%
58%
11%
20%
Fully online
course
9%
57%
7%
24%
Online
collaboration
tools
9%
56%
12%
20%
Experiential or
service learning
14%
49%
13%
23%
Flipped
classroom
6%
47%
17%
29%
Technique
Source: Casey Fabris, Professors Know About High-Tech Teaching

Methods, but Few Use Them, The Chronicle of Higher Education,
February 2015; EAB interviews and analysis.
The Innovators Dilemma
20
Academic Leaders Struggle to Identify, Target, and Scale Best Ideas

Missed Opportunities
Investment Risk
Cannot Surface Innovators
Lessons from Pilots Unexamined
Most creative faculty experiment in

isolation, off leaders radars
Missteps and success stories fail to

inform future investments
Best ideas shelf life lasts only as

long as pioneering facultys interest
Academic leaders struggle to

distinguish what is truly replicable
from other successful projects
Fail to Channel Efforts to Priorities
Replicable innovations impact

department of origin, not area of
greatest need
Instructional inequities emerge

across disciplines
Projects Advanced Recklessly
Projects chosen based on presumed

fit with institutional needs
Administrators do not anticipate

service needs before elevating
projects
21
From Early Adopters to Campus Wide

The Learning Innovations Adoption Curve
Harnessing
Grassroots Activity
Reducing the Risk

of Adoption
Channeling Efforts
to Priorities
Sustaining What
Works
Why Dont More Faculty Teach With Technology?

Perceived Risks Deter Otherwise Willing Adopters
Pedagogical Risk
What if it doesnt work?
Professor integrates active learning into her class. Students fail to
engage productively and learning suffers.
Technological Risk
What if it breaks?
Professor purchases student-response clickers and builds lessons
around them. The clickers malfunction en masse mid-lecture.
Social Risk
What if my peers disapprove?
Professor moves lectures online and uses class time for peer
instruction. Colleagues doubt effectiveness and reputation suffers.
22
The Next Wave of Adopters
23
Strategies for Recruiting a Critical Mass of Faculty

Reducing the Risk of Adoption
Pedagogical Risk
Technological Risk
Social Risk
Arrange for new

adopters to shadow
experienced practitioners
Tie incentives like

computer upgrades to
completion of trainings
Empower faculty
members to reward their
peers innovations
Broker semester-long
mentoring relationships
between faculty
Engage faculty members

in casual tech trainings
outside of workshops
Design faculty grant

programs around
collegial competition
Create opportunities for

limited test runs of
unfamiliar techniques
Track and target support

to upcoming uses of
educational technology
Publicly showcase most

effective pedagogical
redesigns
24
1
Collective
DecisionMaking
Individual
Contribution
1.
Remove Curricular
Platform
2.
3.
4.
Enhance the
Learning Experience
2
5.
Redesign
Academic Policies
Flag Signs of
Student Risk
Support Evolving
Advising Models
6.
7.
8.
Unit Liaison Roles
9.
Mentor Rising-Risk
Student Groups

Requirements

Mentor Matching

Parameters

Intervention
Feedback
Sustaining Momentum
Through Structured
15. Leadership
Scorecards

Funding
17. Departmental
Performance
Dashboard
Faculty at the Center of Student Success
25
Faculty-Student Interactions Aid Risk Identification and Engagement

Average first semester
student hours spent
1
In an advising office
1.6
Powerful predictive
metrics right under
our noses
First-year GPA gap

between students
with and without
attendance problems
(Mississippi State
University, 2013)
In response,
extensive deployment
of early warning
systems in higher ed
1) Based on assumed course load of 15 credit hours over a

15-week semester
225
In a classroom1
74%
Public
Universities
In all cases analyzed, midterm and firstexam grades strongly predicted final grades
Midterm and final grades were also
strongly correlated in a variety of other
academic disciplines at the liberal arts
college, including the humanities, the social
sciences, and the fine arts.
James Barron & Philip Jensen
Journal of College Science Teaching (2014)
78%
Private
Universities
68%
Community
Colleges
Source: Mississippi State University Pathfinders Program; James Barron and Philip Jensen, Midterm
and First-Exam Grades Predict Final Grades in Biology Courses, Journal of College Science Teaching
(Nov/Dec 2014); What Works in Student Retention, Habley et al. (2010); EAB interviews and analysis.
Practice #10: Early Warning Design Requirements
Allay Initial Concerns by Streamlining System
26
Early Alert Processes Should Be Simple, Strategic, and Sensitive
Making it Simple
Single Referral
Faculty given option
to suggest specific
response, but able
to send all alerts to
single office
Target High-Risk
Courses and Students
Focus compliance
efforts at highestimpact populations
All-Inclusive
Includes Assistants
Single system for

logging academic,
attendance, and
behavioral alerts
Train graduate and

teaching assistants
to ensure coverage
of introductory
course sections
Addressing Faculty Concerns

Student Privacy
Positive Messaging
Follow-up
Flexible Faculty Role
Faculty, advisors,
RAs, and support
staff able to submit
alerts, but full
access limited
Students encouraged
to take clear action
steps, rather than
simply alerted of risk
Faculty informed of
alert receipt, as well
as progress and
resolution of cases
Faculty able to
decide whether and
how to get involved
with student issues
Practice #11: Adjustable Alert Parameters
Allow for Flexible Application
27
Instructor-Specific Time Window and Grade Scale Improve Adoption
Faculty asked to determine best

early assessment point
Week 3
Faculty able to choose and prioritize

resources sent to students
Week 6
Typical: Standard
early grade deadline
Faculty determine examination and
grade that constitutes on track
A
Office hours
Supplementary
instruction
Tutoring center
Departmental resource
Typical: Early warning

office dictates response
Typical: Single grade

threshold for institution
Source: WVU Early Alert Program; EAB interviews and analysis.
28
1
Collective
DecisionMaking
Individual
Contribution
1.
Remove Curricular
Platform
2.
3.
4.
Enhance the
Learning Experience

A Preview
2
5.
Redesign
Academic Policies
(Resource Preview)
Flag Signs of
Student Risk
Support Evolving
Advising Models
6.
7.
8.
Unit Liaison Roles
9.
Mentor Rising-Risk
Student Groups

Requirements

Mentor Matching

Parameters

Intervention
Feedback
Sustaining Momentum
Through Structured
15. Leadership
Scorecards

Funding
17. Departmental
Performance
Dashboard
Avoiding Pitfalls in Incentive Design
29
Adjusted KPIs Allow for Fair and Effective Assessment

Anticipate and Counteract
Perverse Incentives
Evaluate Units and Individuals

Based on Controllable Outcomes
Well fight over students if we take

retention too seriously
External factors often cause spikes

in the datawe cant control that
Units not penalized when

students are retained or
graduate at the institution
Incentivizing greater retention
means inflating grades
Create and monitor quality
KPIs to prevent exploitation
We cant be held accountable for early

attrition and undecided students
Incentivize units to improve
native junior graduation rate
Use rolling 3-year averages to

compensate for outlier trends
How can I move the dial on an

institution-wide metric?
Measure and reward concrete
activities that contribute to
institutional success
I have different students and a
different mission than other units
Allow for limited customization
in metric design and weight
Practice #17: Departmental Performance Dashboard
Creating Departmental Accountability
30
Mission-Adjusted Performance Bonuses Push Units to Improve

Strategic Accountability Matrix
Student Success Metric
Department
Biology
Anthropology
Student success metrics

include both outcomes and
unit programs / investments
Example: Student Credit Hours lost to DFW

Weight
Expected
Actual
Score
2.0
381
518
0.74
1.0
Metric weight adjusted

according to unit characteristics
(Philosophy judged less on
internship placements)
Negotiated by chair, dean, and
provost to avoid unjustified
alterations to formula
201
173
Ratio of actual to expected

performance determines
share of annual bonus funds
($400,000 pool)
1.16
Department performance evaluated

across 18 strategic priorities, including:
High-Impact Practices
Student Progression
1.
Internships
1.
Credit hours lost to DFW
2.
Intercultural immersion
2.
Midterm grade reports
3.
Freshmen degree plans
3.
30 credits first year
4.
Advisee satisfaction
4.
60 credits first two years
Measurement Spurs Grassroots Innovation
31
Departments Quick to React to Now-Visible Performance Gaps
Local Curricular Reforms

Aligning pre-requisites with local
community colleges: Biology department
adjusted introductory curriculum to better
suit transfer students
Greater Investment in Student Support

Increasing instructional support for atrisk groups: Psychology department added
supplemental instruction to address
noticeable achievement gap
Revitalizing first-year instruction:

Low-enrollment science programs shifted
from weeding freshmen out to more
engaged pedagogy
Requiring four-year degree plans:

Share of all first-year students with
complete degree plans grew 45% in first
two years of assessment
Lasting Cultural Change

Clarifying each units role in contributing
to institutional performance goals:
Unprecedented awareness of how the actions
of each department add up to ultimate
success or failure
Preempting performance-based funding:

Faculty, staff, and unit leaders acclimated to
culture of evaluation and focused on
continuous improvement, without top-down
system dictate
ROAD MAP
32
Why Program Assessment Must Change

Adapting to a Changing External Environment
Tighter Resources
No longer able to fund all existing
activities to the same standard
Increased Competition
Pressure to improve
outcomes and reduce costs
Raised Ambitions
Strategic goals require
significant investments
Increased Volatility
Rapidly shifting patterns
of demand
More Accountability
Imperative to demonstrate
performance improvement
2015 The Advisory Board Company eab.com 31360C
33
Key Academic Program Metrics
34
Where Will We Find the Resources to Pay for This?
Space
Utilization
Course
Offerings
Course
Success
Curricular
Complexity
Faculty
Workload
Identify course
access
bottlenecks
Consolidate
underutilized
sections
Expand
bottleneck
courses
Simplify degree
requirements
Maximize
capacity
utilization
Better leverage
existing space
Reduce number
of small courses
Limit high-DFW
courses
50%
33%
20%
30%
60%
Classroom
Utilization
Underutilized
Sections
Attempted Credits
Not Completed
Students
Graduating with
Excess Credits
Faculty Teaching
Less than
Standard Load
Reduce niche
course offerings
Differentiate
faculty
workloads
A Clear Opportunity for Improvement
35
High DFW Variability Within a Course Demands Further Analysis

Success Rates Vary Drastically, Even Within a Single Course
Pass Rates by Section and by Course, Fall 2013, Public Masters
University
100%
95%
90%
73%
69%
97%
97%
100%
72%
58%
64%
47%
Acc201
Bio101
Psy200
The greatest (financial) impact we can make at our institution is by

focusing our attention on improving retention in our lower division
courses.
Chief Business Officer
Public Flagship Research Institution
All sections in graphic have a minimum of 19 students.
Simpler Can Be Better
36
Benchmarking Curricular Complexity

Complexity of Engineering Curricula at Three Comparably Ranked Departments
Average
Credit Hours
Completed at
Graduation
Min Credit
Hours
Required
Curricular
Efficiency
Longest
Course
Sequence
Bottleneck
Courses
University A
180
133
4.6
University B
148
120
2.5
University C
168
128
2.6
Source: Jeffrey Wigdahl, Gregory Heileman, Ahmad Slim and Chaouki

Abdullah, Currricular Efficiency: What Role Does It Play in Sudent
Success? 121st ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, June 15-18,
2014. Paper #9609
Calculating Excess Capacity
37
Significant Opportunities to Improve Outcomes With Existing Resources

Factors That Limit Instructional Capacity
Maximum Theoretical Capacity
(# of faculty x standard course load x max class size)
Instructional Capacity
(# of courses offered x max class size)
Course
Releases
Total Seats Offered

(# of courses offered x actual class size)
Small
Classes
Course Registrations
(actual course enrollments)
Course Completions
(credits earned)
Underfilled
Sections
DFW
Rate
Why Havent We Done This Already?
38
Four Roadblocks to Improved Academic Resource Management
Incomplete, Inaccurate Data
Ad Hoc Allocation Processes
Data related to academic resources

spread among multiple ERPs and
shadow systems of varying quality
Even when metrics are available, unit

leaders struggle to design policy
interventions to advance their goals
Lack of Unit-Level Incentives
Heads (and some deans) skeptical

that departments will receive
benefits from their efficiency gains
2015 The Advisory Board Company eab.com 31405D
Few Reallocation Options
Difficult to reallocate specialized faculty

from areas of low demand to areas of
high demand
Source: Business Affairs Forum interviews and analysis.
Efficiency Guardrails
Clarifying and Enforcing Expectations

Academic Resource Utilization Opportunity Analysis
Sample Analyses (Illustrative)
Resource
Target
Options
Classroom Scheduling
> 30% of depts courses outside

of prime time
Schedule more courses off-peak

Obtain waiver from dean
Non-Standard Class
Meeting Pattern
One of six approved meeting

patterns
Use approved meeting pattern

Class Size
> 15 students for undergraduate

course
Cancel small course

Reduce frequency of course offering
Reduce prerequisites
Teach off load
Section Fill Rate
> 60% for multi-section course
Consolidate non-essential sections

Faculty Utilization
Departmental avg 360 SCH/

faculty
Reassign adjunct courses to FT

faculty
Reduce non-essential requirements

Credits Required for

Major
= 120
39

EAB Faculty Role in Student Success SHSU 10-04-16 PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

EAB Faculty Role in Student Success SHSU 10-04-16 PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

The Faculty Role in Student

2015 The Advisory Board Company eab.com

The Data Challenge Behind Student Success

Engaging Faculty in Student Success

Redirecting Resources to Enhance Student Success

2015 The Advisory Board Company eab.com

Why Dont Students Complete?

Causes of Attrition Only Too Familiar

In my interviews with students, I

2015 The Advisory Board Company eab.com

The Data Challenges Underlying Student Success

Advisors cannot fully care

Referrals done manually,

Students set their own

2015 The Advisory Board Company eab.com

Where Better Data Can Help

Large Numbers of Murky Middle Students Leaving Later in College

The Murky Middle

Continued Enrollees Past 6 Years (29,826 students)

84% return for

Graduates within 6 Years (357,405 students)

within six years

2nd to 6th Year Departures (183,827 students)

Source: EAB Murky Middle Project: http://www.eab.com/technology/studentsuccess-collaborative/members/white-papers/the-murky-middle-project

Is This What Rising Risk Looks Like?

Murky Middle GPA Trends Foreshadow Departure Several Terms in Advance

Murky Middle Term GPA Trends Over Time

Average Term GPA

Trends cut across

2015 The Advisory Board Company eab.com

Source: EAB research and data nalysis.

We Need to Be Looking at Different Metrics

Sara Rosen, Senior Vice Provost

Real-time, granular, process-oriented

2015 The Advisory Board Company eab.com

The Data Challenge Behind Student Success

Engaging Faculty in Student Success

Redirecting Resources to Enhance Student Success

2015 The Advisory Board Company eab.com

Six Roles for Faculty in Student Success

Individual and Collective Responsibilities to Guide Institutional Change

Considering student success

Evaluating and scaling

2015 The Advisory Board Company eab.com

Garnering support for

Equipping faculty with

Building buy-in for,

Determining the right metrics, organizational structures, and

Six Roles for Faculty in Student Success

Individual and Collective Responsibilities to Guide Institutional Change

Enrollment Impact Audits

Task-Based Retention Teams

Guided Project Management

Scaling Learning Innovations

Faculty-Led Advisor Training

Advising Career Ladder

Unit Liaison Roles

Distributed Support Balancing

10. Early Warning Design

13. Targeted First-Year

11. Adjustable Alert

14. High-Flyer Transfer

2015 The Advisory Board Company eab.com