Working Towards aSituational

Student Success Model

NEASC Assessment Workshop

William J. Gammell, Ph.D.Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs for Institutional EffectivenessEastern Connecticut State University

Situational Student Success Model*

Low HighStudent’s Academic Potential

Classic “Input” approach

Low to Moderate Potential Moderate to High Potential

• Historically, models of improving academic success have focused on one dimension.

Relied on: demographics -- Race/Ethnicity, SES, 1st Gen Past academic data -- HS GPA, SAT, Placement Exams

Situational Student Success Model*

Low HighStudent’s Academic Potential

Classic “Input” approach

Low to Moderate Potential Moderate to High Potential

• Limitations:

Explained variance – o Some poor prospects flourish, others do noto Some well-prepared students do not persistent Exams

Resource Issues –o Support delivered where not necessary

Situational Student Success Model*

Low HighStudents’ Academic Potential

Classic “Input” approach

High

Students’ Commitment/ Social Readiness Level

Low

Low to Moderate Potential/Low Commitment

Low to Moderate Potential/Low Commitment

Low to Moderate Potential/High Commitment

Moderate to High Potential/High Commitment

What if…..?

Enthusiastic Plugger Self-Reliant Achiever

Lost Learner Capable /Needs to Engage

Situational Student Success Model*

Goal = explore other data tracking routines:

• More actionable; provide opportunity for earlier interventions

• Behavior-based: re-assign risk level based on student behaviors in the first semester or year of enrollment

Access to Success Leading Indicator Project provided foundation

5

Situational Student Success Model*

• Focused on Four Sources of Behavioral Engagement

6

Judicial Proceedings

Student Clubs

2715 FTFT students (100%)

1868 (68.8%) 830 (30.6%)

Transferred

Not Retained

601 (22.1%)

Drop Out/Not Enrolled

229 (8.4%)

Continually Retained

Enrollment Patterns for First Two Years for Fall 2007, Fall 2008, Fall 2009 FTFT Cohorts at Eastern

Stop Out/Return

17 (<1%)

• 4-yr institutions 12.5%• CC 9.6%

7

2715 FTFT students (100%)

1868 (68.8%) 830 (30.6%)

Transferred

Not Retained

601 (22.1%)

Drop Out/Not Enrolled

229 (8.4%)

Continually Retained

Enrollment Patterns, Student Engagement Behavior and Characteristics for First Two Years for Fall 2007, Fall 2008, Fall 2009 FTFT Cohorts at Eastern

Stop Out/Return

17 (<1%)

(%)Pell 20.3URM 15.6Any offense 24.2No Library Training 14.7Complete Training 51.4Any Club Year 1 8.5True Vol Service 27.5Sem 1 GPA > 2.0 89.2Sem 2 GPA > 2.0 89.8

(%)Pell 24.6URM 20.6Any offense 28.8No Library Training 26.0Complete Training 38.4Any Club Year 1 3.9True Vol Service 17.5Sem 1 GPA > 2.0 43.4Sem 2 GPA > 2.0 33.5

• 4-yr institutions 12.5%• CC 9.6%

8

CSU Sister = 97 (3.6%)

Enrollment Patterns, Student Characteristics and Engagement Behaviors for 601 First Transfer Students

(%)Pell 10.3URM 9.7Any offense 25.8No Library Training 16.9Complete Training 44.9Any Club Year 1 5.2True Vol Service 16.5Sem 1 GPA > 2.0 90.7Sem 2 GPA > 2.0 81.3

UConn = 116 (4.3%)

In State Community College = 212 (7.8%)

Other 4-YR = 126 (4.6%)

Out of State Community College = 50 (1.8%)

(%)Pell 12.1URM 5.7Any offense 30.2No Library Training 14.4Complete Training 56.6Any Club Year 1 2.6True Vol Service 20.7Sem 1 GPA > 2.0 96.6Sem 2 GPA > 2.0 99.0

(%)Pell 19.0URM 7.6Any offense 28.6No Library Training 17.8Complete Training 53.5Any Club Year 1 7.1True Vol Service 13.5Sem 1 GPA > 2.0 88.1Sem 2 GPA > 2.0 92.0

(%)Pell 25.5URM 22.8Any offense 25.5No Library Training 25.1Complete Training 39.4Any Club Year 1 7.1True Vol Service 16.5Sem 1 GPA > 2.0 49.0Sem 2 GPA > 2.0 42.8

(%)Pell 16.0URM 8.9Any offense 44.0No Library Training 28.9Complete Training 28.9Any Club Year 1 8.0True Vol Service 12.0Sem 1 GPA > 2.0 40.8Sem 1 GPA > 2.0 43.3 9

Situational Student Success Model*

• Fall 2011 implemented the Library Orientation key indicator with follow-up for all new students that did not participate, or only took the on-line library assessment.

• The search for other indicators continues.

* Adapted from K. Blanchard’s & Paul Hersey’s Situational Leadership Model® and Situational Leadership® II (SLII®) from The Ken Blanchard Companies both are registered trademarks of their respective companies.