Integrating Learning and Sustaining Connections: Helping Students to Navigate the IUPUI Experience_____________________________________________________________________________________

Action Plan

AAC&U General Education Institute, Burlington, VT

June 4 - June 9, 2010

Team Members: Cathy BuyarskiMary FisherKathy JohnsonKhalilah ShabazzRick Ward

2

Executive Summary

In summer 2008, a team of faculty and staff attended the AAC&U Greater Expectations Institute and as a result recommended that the campus create and implement “My IUPUI Experience” as an overarching developmental framework for curricular and co-curricular learning. A key component of the “My IUPUI Experience” framework is the Personal Development Plan (PDP). As defined by IUPUI’s University College, the PDP is the product of a personalized planning process that enables students to understand, implement, and chart progress toward their degree and college goals. By articulating how the Principles of Undergraduate Learning (PULs) will frame their learning and beginning to plan educational experiences, students are empowered to take charge of their own education. Students develop a PDP in their first-year seminar course with the guidance of their instructional team, but the critical feature of the plan is that it is intended to be a living portfolio for each student – open to revision and re-evaluation at critical points in the college journey, as students work in collaboration with academic advisors, faculty, career counselors, experiential learning mentors, and peer mentors in their majors.

While progress toward the implementation of the PDP as a way to support students in taking full advantage of the unique and powerful combination of experiences available at IUPUI has been strong, it must move beyond the first-year seminar in order to become a transformative guide to create coherence throughout students’ educational experience. Focus and attention need to be brought to the challenge of using the PDP/e-portfolio as a means for students to more effectively embrace and reflect upon the IUPUI Principles of Undergraduate Learning (PULs) as a framework for their decision making and understanding of their IUPUI Experience. Thus, students, faculty and staff must become full partners in moving the PDP forward as a central part of the IUPUI undergraduate experience.

Specifically, we must:

Review the critical intersections or points of contact for students to update and receive constructive feedback on their PDP, with particular emphasis placed on writing-intensive courses, career courses, and gateway courses that include heightened self reflection as a critical learning objective. The certification of students from University College to degree-granting programs is a key milestone in students’ progress and should be a point of reflection and planning in the PDP.

Create a plan that ensures that the PDP will continue to be reflected upon, revised, and enhanced by feedback. Ideally this iterative process should permit revisions at the critical points of contact discussed above while ‘freezing’ earlier versions of the PDP for later reflection and/or institutional assessment. Implementation of this plan will require the identification of the most successful ways to integrate the PDP into teaching, advising, mentoring, and curriculum planning in degree-granting schools.

3

Integrate the PULs, PDP, RISE and co-curricular activities as essential aspects of the IUPUI undergraduate experience. The PDP provides a comprehensive platform for using the PULs as a framework for guiding educational planning, and as the basis for self-reflection. This aspect is particularly critical for successful integration of RISE and co-curricular experiences into a coherent curriculum.

Create an assessment plan to determine the effectiveness of the PDP for students after the first year. This assessment plan should focus on learning outcomes, heightened personal and intellectual development, and faster progress toward degree completion.

Focus initial expansion of the PDP on underserved student groups. Students engaged in cohort programs should be prioritized for early adoption. Thereafter, access to the PDP should be strategically extended to student populations not engaged in first-year seminars, such as part-time and transfer students.

Address technology challenges that may limit the implementation, flexibility or utility of the PDP. Support from UITS, CTL and the institutional ePortfolio steering committee is critical to the successful institutionalization of the PDP.

Create a marketing plan so that our campus community understands the power of the PDP in fostering student learning, self-awareness, and a cohesive undergraduate experience.

Invest sufficient human and fiscal resources to insure that the PDP becomes a central part of the IUPUI experience.

4

IUPUI Personal Development Plan (PDP) Action Plan Report

IUPUI undergraduate students have multiple paths of enrollment and engagement in the collegiate experience. Transfer students constitute a large portion of our graduates. Multiple degree opportunities provide a diverse array of learning experiences, and even traditional-aged students in our first-time full-time cohort may live lives that resemble non-traditional students with significant work and family obligations contributing to uneven patterns of enrollment. We honor the diversity of our student body by being flexible with the paths leading to degree attainment; however, this flexibility can lead to a lack of coherence and meaning in an IUPUI education. It is therefore critically important that we provide tools for students that allow them, with the guidance of faculty, advisors and mentors, to develop a sense of unity and significance about their IUPUI experience.

In summer 2008, a team of faculty and staff attended the AAC&U Greater Expectations Institute in order to begin developing just such a framework and tool. The team recommended that the campus create and implement “My IUPUI Experience” as an overarching developmental framework for curricular and co-curricular learning that would define the distinctive character of an IUPUI undergraduate experience.

A key component of the “My IUPUI Experience” framework is the Personal Development Plan (PDP), which allows students to more effectively map out and navigate their academic and co-curricular experiences, as well as their subsequent careers. As defined by IUPUI’s University College, the PDP is the product of a personalized planning process that enables students to understand, implement, and chart progress toward their degree and college goals. By articulating how the Principles of Undergraduate Learning (PULs) will frame their learning and beginning to plan educational experiences, such as those included in the “RISE to the IUPUI Challenge” initiative, students are empowered to take charge of their own education. Students develop a PDP in their first-year seminar course with the

5

guidance of their instructional team, but the critical feature of the plan is that it is intended to be a living portfolio for each student – open to revision and re-evaluation at critical points in the college journey, as students work in collaboration with academic advisors, faculty, career counselors, experiential mentors, and peer mentors in their majors.

The PDP is intended to provide students with a framework for “self-authorship,” a concept referring to a student’s ability to develop a comprehensive internal identity that allows him or her to interpret and guide experiences and actions (Baxter-Magolda, 2007). When fully implemented, the PDP will make current academic experiences more meaningful and will provide direction for the future. As students undertake guided reflection on “who they are and who they want to become,” they will engage more deeply in their learning. It is anticipated that the PDP will articulate with the institutional “ePortfolio,” which will serve as a repository for artifacts that reflect the student’s academic journey and accomplishments, and also provide the foundation for the student’s professional resume. Its portability in an electronic medium is essential for complete access to the PDP for all of these stakeholders.

The remainder of this action plan is divided into five sections. We first provide an overview of progress made since the 2008 AAC&U Institute. We then present important institutional considerations that provide context for the recommended action steps, with a particular focus on institutional resources. Finally we provide a timeframe for implementation and consider the longer-term impact that the PDP is likely to have on IUPUI students.

1. Progress to Date

The report filed by the 2008 AAC&U Institute team included three planned phases of development for the PDP. The following accomplishments outlined in two of the three phases have since been completed:

2008-2009

Piloted the PDP in 52 sections (50%) of the fall, 2008 first-year seminar courses with approximately 1,200 students completing some version of a PDP.

Conducted thorough assessment of the learning outcomes of the PDP with students who completed a PDP in a fall 2008 first-year seminar. Assessment was conducted through a student survey as well as content analysis of a random sample of PDPs. In addition, focus groups were held with faculty and advisors in first-year seminars to discover opportunities and challenges associated with the implementation of the PDP as part of the first-year seminar curriculum. A summary of the assessment results can be found in Appendix A.

Began campus conversations about “My IUPUI Experience,” including the importance of the PDP for helping students to strategically plan their curricular and co-curricular experiences.

6

2009-2010

Implemented the Personal Development Plan in approximately 75% of all fall, 2009 first-year seminar courses

Established a working group to develop an electronic version of the PDP within the institutional ePortfolio Project. Team members included representatives from the ePortfolio Project, UITS, CTL, Informatics, Science, Engineering and Technology and University College.

Hosted a week-long faculty development institute to assist faculty and other stakeholders in building the curricular scaffolding in the first-year seminar necessary to support successful completion of a PDP that met all stated learning outcomes.

2. Institutional Considerations

The Personal Development Plan grew out of a concern that students were disengaged from their undergraduate curriculum and largely unaware of the Principles of Undergraduate Learning. The PDP was intended to serve as a transformative guide to create coherence throughout students’ undergraduate careers as it encouraged integration, reflection and intentionality. Two years of experience with early versions of the Personal Development Plan have demonstrated that it can be effectively implemented in first-year learning communities. Survey data from these pilot studies indicate that students perceive the PDP to be a useful tool that promotes valuable learning experiences. A majority of these students expressed interest in continuing to use this tool when navigating their educational journey. To fully evaluate the impact of the PDP it needs to be moved beyond the first-year experience and made available to a wider range of students. A number of considerations need to be addressed in preparing for a wider implementation of the PDP. These considerations can be organized around the following five questions:

How do we extend the PDP beyond the first semester?

Identify logical places of contact beyond the first semester. These targeted opportunities include the transition from University College to the major; semester-by-semester advising in the major; RISE experiences, and internships or capstones. Other “PDP –intensive courses” that could be targeted would include expanded second semester learning communities; key gateway and writing-intensive courses such as Writing W131, and Speech R110; career courses in the major; and pre-graduation audits in the senior year.

Involve additional faculty and professional advisors who would assist students in reviewing and revising their PDPs at these targeted opportunities. A number of approaches can be imagined for expanding this pool. First it is important to emphasize that a well-developed PDP includes a critical information and resources that can be useful to faculty, academic advisors, career counselors and other professional staff –enabling the tool to sell itself. For example, student

7

reflection on academic goals would help with selecting a major and academic advisors would have access to a curricular plan that would facilitate course selection. Faculty would have access to earlier samples of student work to help assess readiness for more advanced work, and career counselors would have the material to assist the student with the construction of a resume and a career search strategy.

Provide training to insure that faculty and staff have the requisite understanding to make effective use of the PDP. Faculty fellowships, small training grants, workshops, on-line modules and well designed prompts on the PDP itself are several examples of strategies through which this training could be provided.

Develop strategic partnerships among the student, advisors, faculty and other professional staff. The ability of the PDP to serve as a transformative tool to integrate the undergraduate experience depends on the degree to which guided reflection is sustained throughout the student’s career. Faculty and staff must possess the time to read and respond to this guided reflection. Students must see the PDP as a compass for navigating their educational journey instead of an assignment done once and left behind. Frequent reflection must be paired with periodic assessment and feedback. Although this could be perceived as adding more work to faculty and advisor roles, it is important to stress that this work can be distributed and integrated in ways that greatly lessen this burden. For example, reflective writing is expected in many courses including freshmen writing, speech, threshold courses in the major, and all experiential learning (RISE) courses. By integrating the PDP into already established practices, faculty members and advisors do not have to shoulder the entire responsibility for the critical reflections that are central to the successful PDP. Additional input on student reflections could be provided through peer mentors, alumni, student affairs personnel, and community partners.

Include and target natural cohorts of students that persist across their college careers as earlier adopters of the expanded PDP. For example, Student African American Brotherhood (SAAB), Student African American Sisterhood (SAAS), Norman Brown Scholars, Nina Pulliam Scholars, Diversity Research Scholars, and Honors College students retain a connection to advisors and mentors throughout their careers even as they transfer across academic units. Similar programs also exist within most schools (Massarachia and Olaniyan Scholars in Liberal Arts; Dean’s Scholars in the School of Science) and could provide small, stable communities that would benefit from the implementation of the PDP. In addition, one or more departments could be identified that possess the necessary resources to maximize the utility of early adoption of the PDP. These characteristics would include a well-developed first year experience, the availability of professional academic advisors, a threshold course, a career course or strong career development office, required experiential learning and a capstone course. The Department of Psychology has many of these characteristics and would be an excellent candidate department for piloting expanded utilization of the PDP.

How do we expand the PDP to underserved groups?

8

Consideration of priorities for early expansion of the PDP should include likely “high impact practices” aimed at underserved groups. Several of the cohort groups mentioned previously also include under-represented populations that have been shown to benefit from such additional programming in the AAC&U publication “High-Impact Educational Practices.”

UC students on probation may benefit as earlier adopters of the PDP. These students are known to be at greater risk for non-retention but they are also likely to persist in UC longer than students with better academic records (who more quickly transfer to their schools) and are already required to engage in academic interventions to which continuation of a PDP could easily be added.

Transfer students present a more complex problem as they enter the university with differing degrees of life-experience, differing amounts of transfer credit and uneven levels of preparation for success in college. Students transferring to IUPUI generally experience lower retention and graduation and the PDP may offer particularly beneficial opportunities for improving success of this diverse group of individuals. In addition, this group often misses the first year experiences that introduce the PULs and their foundation to learning at IUPUI.

Part-time students taking fewer than 7 credits per semester - a cohort also known to be high risk (for non-retention) and who currently have little access to the powerful pedagogies that have been deployed to aid the first time full time cohort.

Although all of these cohorts stand to benefit considerably from intentional use of the PDP, there is currently no clear mechanism for introducing the PDP to any of these underserved groups. Strategies to overcome this problem should be generated and implemented as soon as is feasible during the next several years.

How do we insure that the PDP promotes engaged student learning?

The value of the PDP will vary with the degree to which its many features are utilized by students and the degree to which the student receives timely and meaningful feedback on their PDP postings. Student engagement will depend, in part, on structured opportunities (assignments, course requirements, advising appointments, etc.) to use the PDP as well as on the ease of access and the culture of use among students’ peers.

Student ownership of the PDP is important and a major challenge is to create a PDP interface that is attractive, easy to use, and meaningful to the student. Engaged use will be unlikely if the student sees the PDP as a ‘once-and-done’ assignment or an arbitrary requirement of course completion.

9

Engaged feedback will only occur if faculty and other “learning partners” view the PDP as ‘value added’ rather than as ‘added work.’ Again, ease of use, utility and institutional culture will determine the level of faculty and staff engagement with the PDP. Every effort should be made to showcase best practices related to the PDP and to create faculty incentives and awards related to this work.

Co-training on reflective learning will be necessary for students, faculty and staff. For example, how can the developmental aspects of a student’s reflective writing be evaluated over the course of several semesters? Who provides feedback on the reflections? How can we insure that there is learning through reflection? How will student growth be assessed over time? Who is most suited to evaluate this growth? How can we insure that earlier work is preserved so that this development can be followed? Writing faculty at IUPUI have expertise in this area and should be brought into the project to assist with faculty development.

How do we insure that the technology is adequate to the task?

The successful expansion of the PDP as a tool to enhance student engagement and integration of their undergraduate experience will depend on the existence of a flexible, efficient, and easy to use electronic interface.

Data collected over the next two years will help assess the degree to which the current technology meets these needs. Sustained development of an effective PDP will require the ongoing (and perhaps expanded) commitment of UITS and CTL.

The institutional ePortfolio Project should be merged with the PDP. There is clear overlap in the objectives of these initiatives, and both seek to provide a vehicle for managing and documenting student achievement. Critically, they both integrate reflection with experience to create better learning outcomes. Merging these efforts will synergistically provide advantages to both. The PDP will provide a new focus for the ePortfolio and generate the student and faculty acceptance needed to insure continuation of the project. The PDP in turn will benefit from the existing technological experience and cross-institutional experience associated with the ePortfolio project.

Student acceptance of the PDP and recognition of its importance as a useful tool for career preparation may create opportunities to seek student support for increased allocation of technology fees designated for this purpose. Other universities have found that students favor this use of technology fees.

Some of the functional flexibility of the PDP will be tied to coordination with SIS. For example, finding a mechanism to coordinate the “assign advisor” function in SIS with the generation of an invitation to view that student’s PDP would facilitate moving the PDP beyond University College.

How do we determine capacity, weighing potential impact against limited resources?

10

Cost of the implementation in terms of dollars, time, and effort will need to be balanced against its potential to enhance and integrate undergraduate education.

Determination of this capacity will require careful assessment of data obtained from the next phase of implementation and may require three more years of effort before meaningful results can be obtained.

Consideration should be given to focus on high impact groups (as described above) and natural partners in schools that already have some form of portfolio review (Herron School of Art, The School of Education, Informatics). Schools which lack such traditions should be consulted to determine programs and cohorts of students which might benefit most from adoption of the PDP.

The degree to which students find the PDP useful will help determine the demand for continued expansion. If students develop habits of use, they will drive the institutional priorities toward wider adoption and increased support of the PDP.

3. Insuring adequate institutional support.

Institutional support is critical throughout all phases of the implementation plan. Previous piloting has been resource-neutral given that the PDP has been infused into first-year seminars using minimal technology. University College faculty and advising staff have been enthusiastic proponents of the PDP, and there has been a high degree of control associated with its use, including faculty development, curricular integration, and assessment.

In future phases, it is critical that support for the PDP be expanded beyond the scope of University College to include a broad array of constituents including students, Deans, Associate Deans, and Department Chairs from Liberal Arts, Science, and professional schools, faculty engaged as teachers, advisors, and mentors, professional staff advisors, alumni, and community partners.

The timing of the PDP implementation plan is fortuitous. IUPUI is experiencing record-high enrollments and administrators are keenly aware of the need to ensure that additional students’ needs will be met through classroom, laboratory, and co-curricular experiences, advising, and other support services. The PDP has tremendous potential for helping to ensure that students engage in their plans of study as efficiently as possible during a time of rapid campus growth. Furthermore, enrollment growth creates a revenue stream that can help to offset costs associated with implementation of the PDP. At the same time, the state of Indiana has adopted performance-funding incentives for degree completion and on-time graduation that creates internal pressure to ensure that students graduate in a timely manner. The PDP provides a mechanism for helping to accomplish this goal, while at the same time enhancing student learning and students’ appreciation of the value of an integrative, liberal education.

11

Institutional support is needed both in terms of human resources and financial support for expanding the scope of the PDP, particularly in later phases. The following resource implications will need to be carefully considered:

A Campus Coordinator is needed to oversee the implementation, assessment, and subsequent marketing of the PDP to the IUPUI campus community. The ideal candidate for this work is Dr. Cathy Buyarski. However, Dr. Buyarski will need assistance from additional staff as well as from faculty partners in order to ensure that these efforts are successful, particularly given the many additional responsibilities that she currently has. A task force from the Council for Retention and Graduation should serve in an advisory capacity to Dr. Buyarski and the implementation team.

A 50% FTE Faculty Fellow position – based either in University College or in Academic Affairs – should be created in 2012-2014 to assist with the implementation plan, assessment of outcomes, and marketing.

Effective use and learning from the PDP will require both technological training and pedagogical training of students, teachers, advisors and mentors. This will create a demand on the time of existing faculty and staff and may lead to a need for review of expectations for the way faculty and staff members prioritize their responsibilities. Reward systems will require revision and additional professional advising and career staff will be needed, particularly in the Schools of Liberal Arts and Science.

The technology needed to advance the PDP and to integrate it within the broader ePortfolio infrastructure will demand additional resources. We recommend that funding from the student technology fee be allocated to this project to ensure its timely development and implementation.

Administrative support from Deans, Associate Deans, and Department Chairs from within core schools is essential for helping to motivate (and reward) participation from faculty, staff, and students. Successful students should be celebrated and their achievements and testimonials incorporated into marketing campaigns for prospective students.

Support from Alumni Associations, employers, and community partners are needed to amplify the value of the PDP for career preparation and life-long learning.

Utilization of the PDP should be a criterion for receipt of professional development funds among advising staff. JACADA and the Council of Academic Advisors should endorse the value of the PDP and recognize ‘best PDP practices’ through advising awards.

4. Timeline for Continued Implementation and Expansion of the PDP

12

2010 – 2012Continue implementation of PDP in First Year Seminars (FYS) and strategically expand use of the PDP into select cohort and academic programs.

Conduct a pilot of an electronic PDP using ePortfolio technology in six sections of the first-year seminar course. Carry out appropriate assessment of the pilot leading to revisions of the content and technology of the ePortfolio-based PDP.

Identify cohort programs for expansion of the PDP. Launch pilot programs with a small number of programs. Targets for expansion might include:

a. Support programs for underserved students.b. Themed Learning Communities with a focus on extended the PDP beyond the

first-year seminar.c. Programs that foster RISE experiences (e.g, Center for Service and Learning).d. Gateway courses including ENG-W131 and COMM-R110. English has a strong

writing focus on self-discovery; Communication makes use of peer and self-evaluation.

e. Junior/senior integrator courses in at least one department/school.

Develop a marketing and communication strategy to foster understanding of the PDP with key constituencies including Deans, academic advisors, career counselors, student affairs staff, and targeted groups of faculty engaged in teaching strategies that promote self-understanding and integrative learning such as Gateway, current ePort users, and writing intensive courses.

Develop a marketing and communication strategy aimed at helping students –and their families -- understand and support the goals of the PDP.

Develop the infrastructure to support expansion of the PDP. This should include a website with sample portfolios, technology guidance for students and faculty, and resources to support advisors, faculty, and mentors in the use of the PDP in their interactions with students.

Conduct assessment to gather evidence of the impact of the PDP on student learning, persistence, and academic achievement. This should include assessment of students’ ability to integrate learning and sustain connections between their curricular and co-curricular experiences.

2012-2014

Focus on institutionalizing the PDP as a significant aspect of the IUPUI undergraduate experience.

13

Move use of the PDP into academic schools and departments with a focus on ensuring its use throughout the students’ academic career, recognizing that implementation of the PDP will look different in each school. Critical points of contact may include:

o Academic advisingo Career counseling and career courseso RISE experienceso Required courses such as an introduction to the major or capstone

Expand the introduction of the PDP to populations not served by first-year seminar courses including part-time and transfer students.

Continue and refine marketing and communication strategies for both students and campus constituencies.

Expand assessment efforts across the academic experience and framed by specific academic programs.

Institute faculty fellows to provide faculty leadership for institutionalizing the PDP in academic programs and schools.

6. The Potential Impact of the PDP on Student Learning and Development

The PDP will provide the opportunity for students to unify their curricular, co-curricular, and personal experiences throughout their educational journey. Synthesizing the various experiences through the transformative platform of the PDP allows students to continually engage in their own holistic learning process. Students can define what they would like their educational experience to be, while incorporating the other components of their life. The PDP also allows students to reflect upon their academic journey by providing meaning behind their charted academic plan. Thus, the PDP contains a variety of customizable “resources” that include opportunities for a thorough analysis of the courses and co-curricular experiences taken in pursuit of the degree and the application of these materials to their current and future lives. Additionally, students are provided a virtual repository of memories and accomplishments; as well as the events, transitions, successes, failures, and emotions that comprise their IUPUI experience. The reflective opportunity is critical to personal and intellectual growth as it is through the process of reviewing their experiences, reanalyzing situations, and updating their academic plans, future goals, and personal objectives that such growth occurs. In addition, the PDP will include frequent feedback from faculty, mentors, advisors and other partners in learning. Using this guided reflection as a tool supports and encourages use of the PDP and provides students of various academic disciplines with a common framework for charting their educational journey. Students will be able to engage with each other, either in one-on-one interactions or in peer group settings, around themes and developmental needs in their journey. Exercises in sharing the PDP have the ability to strengthen student-to-student interaction and cultivate peer mentoring opportunities. In open reflection

14

environments, students can gain understanding of how to process their personal experiences and attitudes through interaction with others.

When the Personal Development Plan is moved beyond first semester courses and adopted widely by students, faculty and staff, it will provide the compass by which students will navigate their IUPUI Experience in partnership with faculty and staff mentors. The advising and mentoring relationships shown to be critical to student success will be enhanced by working with a common tool to guide and interpret student learning. Further, engaged learning (RISE) and a Principled Curriculum (PULs) provide the building blocks for constructing the IUPUI Experience. The PDP will provide the mortar binding together these diverse elements through integrative, deliberate and guided reflection. In this manner IUPUI students will be able to pursue the promise of a liberal education as outlined in recent initiatives of the American Association of Colleges and Universities. The Principles of Undergraduate Learning will be more fully embraced as the developmental learning objectives as they were originally intended and students will generate an ongoing self and institutional assessment through their creation, modification and completion of a PDP, linked to a robust and user-friendly electronic portfolio.

APPENDIX A

PDP Assessment Student Survey Summary

15

Reporting and Analysis Completed by Michele Hansen, University College Director of AssessmentFall 2008

Quantitative Analysis

During the fall 2008 semester a total of approximately 1,500 students were enrolled in 55 separate FYS and LC course sections. A total of 800 first-year students enrolled in these course sections participated in a post-participation survey designed to better understand students’ perceptions of the PDP and PDP processes (Appendix B). Of the 800 survey participants, 769 students indicated that they had completed a PDP while 31 students responded that they had not finished a PDP. An independent sample t-test was completed to compare participant students who did not complete a PDP with those who did.

The criterion measure was the categorical means for each of the learning outcomes. For two of the three learning outcomes assessed by the survey, differences between the groups were significant at the 90% confidence level, suggesting that the scores of the students’ who completed the process were higher than the scores of those that did not. These included goal setting (p=.076) and planning (p=.024). The differences between the groups for the learning outcome of self-assessment were not found to be significantly different. This should be considered when assessing the scores for self-assessment below.

Self-AssessmentOn average, questions related to self-assessment were answered most favorably (Mean = 4.08) when compared to the other learning outcomes. Five questions were related to this outcome. The specific question garnering the most positive reactions was “I have chosen a major or career that supports my interests and personal values” with a mean of 4.17. Collecting slightly less support was the question “I know what obstacles I have to overcome to succeed in college” with a mean of 4.13. This question was followed by “I have chosen a major or career that matches my strengths, skills, and competencies” which received a lower mean of 4.06. The question “I clearly understand my academic strengths, skills, and competencies” received a similar mean of 4.05. The least positive reactions for this section came to the question “I feel that I have a sense of purpose at IUPUI” which received a mean of 3.87.The relatively high means for all of these five questions suggests that students agree that they are correctly self-assessing.

Goal Setting Goal Setting was measured by six questions on the survey (Mean = 3.91). The most positively answered question in this section was “I have goals that are measureable, achievable, and realistic” with a mean of 4.19 which was the highest individual mean for any question in the survey. The second question for this category was “I have clear career goals” with a mean of 4.03.The next most agreed upon question was “I have a time frame for achieving each of my goals” which received a mean of 3.89. This question was closely followed by “I have clearly defined academic goals for at least the next two years” with a mean of 3.87. The question “I can think of specific IUPUI learning experiences that will help me achieve my goals” received a mean of 3.82.The least agreed upon statement for this category was “My academic

16

goals are connected to IUPUI's Principles of Undergraduate Learning (the PULs)” which had a mean of 3.68. These results suggest that students agreed more strongly with having clear, achievable goals, but less strongly when putting those goals down into a specific timeline or timeframe. Likewise, they suggest that students felt more strongly that they chose the major or career that fits with their interests and values, but they felt less strongly when asked about specific co-curricular options or connections between their goals and the PUL’s.

PlanningPlanning was measured by four questions, and received a similar category mean (Mean = 3.92) to goal setting. The most agreed upon statement for this category was “I have developed a preliminary plan of study for my possible major” with a mean of 4.01. The next most agreed upon question was “I am able to identify specific action plans for overcoming potential obstacles” with a mean of 3.90. This was followed by the question “I have identified options for gaining experience outside the classroom” with a mean of 3.88.The least agreed upon of the category was “I have detailed academic plan with specific action steps” with a lower mean of 3.86. This suggests that the students agreed more strongly with the broad idea that they had a preliminary plan of study, but agreed less when identifying more precise elements such as detailed academic plans and specific action steps.

Other – SustainabilityThe last three questions of the survey did not specifically address any learning outcomes, but were included to assess the sustainability of the program. These questions received lower means than any of the learning outcome related questions. Two questions: “I will utilize my PDP throughout my college career to help me make educational and career choices” and “I will collaborate with my academic advisor in updating my PDP in future semesters” both received means of 3.56. Additionally, the question “I will continue to update and consult my PDP in future semesters” received the lowest mean of any question in the survey at 3.34. However, it is important to keep in mind that these results still indicated a strong level of overall agreeance. For instance, the question with the lowest mean (3.34) still had 82% of students either agreeing or answering neutral.

ConclusionThe results of the quantitative analysis of the survey indicate that, on average, the students do agree that they are achieving the learning outcomes set by this program. For instance, the average score for all questions related to learning outcomes was 3.96, with a score of 4 indicating that the student agreed. The outcomes most supported in the survey were self-assessment and exploration. The outcomes less supported were goal setting and planning. The questions regarding sustainability were rated lower by students, but still generally agreed upon. This mirrors the results of the focus groups in which both faculty and advisors felt the students were not seeing the PDP as a long-term tool. This is a potential area for improvement.

Qualitative Analysis

Students were asked to identify valuable aspects of the PDP and the ways in which to improve the PDP process. Most students responded to the three (3) open-ended items included in the questionnaire. Student participants’ open-ended survey responses were analyzed and organized into major topical and categorical themes. These emergent categories allowed for individual student perceptions of the Personal Development Plan (PDP) to be considered collectively. Theme categories were considered to be “emerged or notable” if 5% or more of students responded in a similar manner. In a number of instances a singular student comment addressed more than one topic or category. In these occurrences, student comments were considered in multiple areas of discussion and were included in multiple categories.

Please list three specific things you learned from completing a PDP:

64% of student survey participants learned how to assess their learning and development during their first year of college by completing a PDP. Students were able to identify various aspects of self assessment such as self awareness, self learning and/or personal development.

47% of student participants mentioned learning how to set and accomplish goals as part of completing their PDP.

35% of survey participants learned various aspects of academic planning (i.e. four-year plans, planning semester/yearly schedules to complete major coursework, and the importance of future and/or alternative academic plans) by completing the PDP.

24% of student survey participants learned to manage time and balance academic schedules as part of completing a PDP.

22% of students learned how to choose a major/program of study and comprehended program of study requirements by completing the PDP process.

20% of students learned the importance of choosing and planning for a career. Students also learned that work or internship experience was an essential component of learning beyond the classroom as part of completing the PDP process.

19% of students learned how to navigate their college/academic environments by participating in a PDP.

15% of students learned the importance of future and life planning as part of completing a PDP.

19

15% of student learned and improved study skills and were able to identify their learning styles and personality traits. Additionally, students were able to learn valuable life skills by completing the PDP process.

Other minor themes that emerged from student responses included the importance of peer or reference groups and overall support systems. Students also reported learning teacher and/or college expectations at IUPUI. Others identified learning specific content such as the Principles of Undergraduate Learning (PULS), Plan B, or PDP and/or valuable lessons from course assignments (i.e. cultural diversity assignment). Additionally, some students revealed what they liked and dislike about college in general, programs of study and/or participating in the PDP process.

What was the most valuable aspect of completing a PDP? (N = 648)

38% of students responded that general academic planning was the most valuable aspect of completing a PDP.

29% of students indicated that self – assessment and reflection was the most valuable aspect of completing a PDP

18% of student respondents specified that planning a course schedule was the most valuable component of completing a PDP.

13% of students responded that participating in goal setting was the most valuable aspect of completing a PDP.

5% of survey participants specified that developing a written / paper outline was the most valuable piece of completing a PDP. Similarly, 5% of students specified that developing a 4-year plan was most valuable.

What specific suggestions do you have for improving the PDP process? (N=399)

19% of student survey participants suggested for improvement implementing a more structured PDP process.

19% of students suggested improving the PDP process by providing additional guidance and instruction.

8% of students indicated nothing when prompted for suggestions for improving the PDP process, while 8% of students responded nothing (Positive).

20

7% of students responded that having more definitive due dates and appropriate assignment timelines would improve the overall PDP process.

Student responded with a highly stratified list of suggestions for improving the PDP process courses: 6% of students suggested making the process more fun and interesting, requiring less time commitments and restraints, and involving fewer writing assignments. Students also suggested completing the PDP assignments in class (5%), more class scheduling assistance (5%), and starting or completing the PDP process earlier (5%). Only 4% of students indicated that they found the PDP program to be ineffective or suggested its cancelation.

Academic Achievement and Retention

A total of 797 first-year, first-time students Fall 2008 students (Indianapolis only) were enrolled in a First-Year Seminar that required PDP completion (40 sections) and 1568 students were enrolled in a seminar that did not require PDP completion. There were a number of differences between the students enrolled in PDP-required sections compared to students not in PDP-Required sections. Students enrolled in PDP-required sections had significantly lower high school grade point averages (GPAs) (3.28 and 3.21, respectively) and the lower SAT scores compared to non-required PDP sections (1033 and 978, respectively). Students enrolled in PDP required sections also tended to be female and conditionally admitted students.

Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) results suggested that students enrolled in First-Year Seminar sections that completed the PDP had significantly higher fall semester GPAs (2.68) compared to students not enrolled in sections that required PDP completion (2.59), even after High School GPAs, SAT scores, Age, Gender, Ethnicity, and First Generation Status were entered as covariates (p = .018). Please see Table 1.

Results of a logistic regression analysis suggested that students enrolled in First-Year Seminar sections that required PDP completion did not have significantly different retention rates compared to students not in PDP-required sections (73% and 74%, respectively) once High School GPAs, SAT scores, Gender, Age, Ethnicity, and First-Generation status were entered as the first step in the model (p =.539). Please see Table 2.

Table 1. Fall 2008 First-Time Students: PDP Required and First Semester Grade Point Average

21

N

Average Cumulative

GPA

Adjusted Cumulative

GPA

PDP Required Sections 746 2.64 2.68

Not Required Sections 1421 2.61 2.59

Overall 2167 2.62

Note 1: Missing cases were excluded from the analysis.

Note 2: Students who Withdrew or who were Administratively Withdrawn from a First-Year Seminar were excluded (N=96 students).

Note 3: ANCOVA results suggested that students enrolled in First-Year Seminar sections that completed the PDP had significantly higher fall semester GPAs compared to students not enrolled in sections that required PDP completion, even after High School GPAs, SAT scores, Age, Gender, Ethnicity, and First Generation Status were entered as covariates (p = .018).

Table 2. Fall 2008 First-Time Students: PDP Required and One Year Retention Rate

NFall-to-Fall

Retention Rate

PDP Required Sections 797 73%

Not Required Sections 1568 74%

Overall 2365 74%

Note 1: Missing cases were excluded from the analysis.

Note 2: Students who Withdrew or who were Administratively Withdrawn from a First-Year Seminar were excluded (N=96 students).

Note 3: Logistic regression analysis suggested that students enrolled in First-Year Seminar sections that required PDP completion did not have significantly different retention rates compared to students not in PDP-required sections once High School GPAs, SAT scores, Gender, Age, Ethnicity, and First-Generation status were entered as the first step in the model (p =.539).