NSSE 2018 Engagement Indicators - Malone

NSSE 2018

Engagement IndicatorsMalone University

IPEDS: 203775

About Your Engagement Indicators ReportTheme 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

Report Sections Supportive Environment

Overview (p. 3)

Theme Reports (pp. 4-13)

Mean Comparisons

Score Distributions

Performance on Indicator Items

Interpreting Comparisons

How Engagement Indicators are Computed

Rocconi, L., & Gonyea, R. M. (2015, May). Contextualizing student engagement effect sizes: An empirical analysis. Paper presented at the Association for Institutional Research Annual

Forum, Denver, CO.

Mean comparisons report both statistical significance and effect size. 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 (p. 3).

EIs vary more among students within an institution than between institutions, like many experiences and outcomes in higher

education. As a result, focusing attention on average scores alone amounts to examining the tip of the iceberg. It’s equally important

to understand how student engagement varies within your institution. Score distributions indicate how EI scores vary among your

students and those in your comparison groups. The Report Builder and your Major Field Report (both to be released in the fall)

offer valuable perspectives on internal variation and help you investigate your students’ engagement in depth.

Each EI is scored on a 60-point scale. To produce an indicator score, the response set for each item is converted to a 60-point scale

(e.g., Never = 0; Sometimes = 20; Often = 40; Very often = 60), and the rescaled items are averaged. Thus a score of zero means a

student responded at the bottom of the scale for every item in the EI, while a score of 60 indicates responses at the top of the scale

on every item.

For more information on EIs and their psychometric properties, refer to the NSSE website: nsse.indiana.edu

Detailed information about EI score means, distributions, and tests of statistical significance.Detailed Statistics (pp. 16-19)

NSSE 2018 Engagement IndicatorsAbout This Report

Comparisons with High-

Performing Institutions (p. 15)

Comparisons of your students’ average scores on each EI with those of students at institutions whose

average scores were in the top 50% and top 10% of 2017 and 2018 participating institutions.

Displays how average EI scores for your students compare with those of students at your comparison

group institutions.

Academic Challenge

Learning with Peers

Experiences with Faculty

Campus Environment

Engagement Indicators (EIs) provide a useful summary of

the detailed information contained in your students’ NSSE

responses. By combining responses to related NSSE

questions, each EI offers valuable information about a

distinct aspect of student engagement. Ten indicators,

based on three to eight survey questions each (a total of 47

survey questions), are organized into four broad themes as

shown at right.

Detailed views of EI scores within the four themes for your students and those at comparison group

institutions. Three views offer varied insights into your EI scores:

Responses to each item in a given EI are summarized for your institution and comparison groups.

Box-and-whisker charts show the variation in scores within your institution and comparison groups.

Straightforward comparisons of average scores between your students and those at comparison

group institutions, with tests of significance and effect sizes (see below).

2 • NSSE 2018 ENGAGEMENT INDICATORS

Engagement Indicators: Overview

▲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.

First-Year Students

Theme Engagement Indicator



Learning Strategies







Supportive Environment

Seniors




Learning Strategies








----

△----

-- --

--

▽

----

--

--

△

-- △ --

----

▲-- --

--

△

AICUO

--

--

Carnegie: Master's M

--

--

--Campus

Environment

Campus

Environment --

Your seniors

compared with

Your seniors

compared with

Your seniors

compared with

Experiences

with Faculty

--

--

--

-- --

--

--

------

Learning with

Peers

--

--Academic

Challenge

--

--

Engagement Indicators are summary measures based on sets of NSSE questions examining key dimensions of student engagement.

The ten indicators are organized within four broad themes: Academic Challenge, Learning with Peers, Experiences with Faculty, and

Campus Environment. The tables below compare average scores for your students with those in your comparison groups.

Use the following key:

Learning with

Peers

CCCU Institutions AICUO

--


--

--

▽

Your first-year students

compared with


compared with


compared with

------

Experiences

with Faculty

CCCU Institutions

--

NSSE 2018 Engagement Indicators

Academic

Challenge

----

--------

Malone University

Overview

----

NSSE 2018 ENGAGEMENT INDICATORS • 3

Academic Challenge: First-year students

Mean Comparisons

Engagement Indicator



Learning Strategies


Score Distributions

Challenging intellectual and creative work is central to student learning and collegiate quality. Colleges and universities promote

student learning by challenging and supporting them to engage in various forms of deep learning. Four Engagement Indicators are

part of this theme: Higher-Order Learning, Reflective & Integrative Learning, Learning Strategies, and Quantitative Reasoning.

Below and on the next page are three views of your results alongside those of your comparison groups.

MaloneYour first-year students compared with

CCCU Institutions AICUO Carnegie: Master's M

NSSE 2018 Engagement IndicatorsAcademic Challenge

Malone University

Effect

size

39.4 36.9 .19 37.6 .15 37.6 .14

Mean Mean

Effect

size Mean

Effect

size Mean

.07

37.9 37.5 .03 37.5 .04 38.4 -.04

35.5 35.0 .04 34.8 .07 34.7

-.06Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard

deviation; Symbols on the Overview page are based on effect size and p before rounding; *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001 (2-tailed).

Higher-Order Learning Reflective & Integrative Learning

Quantitative ReasoningLearning Strategies

26.6 24.6 .13 27.4 -.06 27.5

Notes: Each box-and-whiskers chart plots the 5th (bottom of lower bar), 25th (bottom of box), 50th (middle line), 75th (top of box), and 95th (top of upper bar) percentile scores.

The dot represents the mean score. Refer to Detailed Statistics for your institution’s sample sizes.

0

15

30

45

60

Malone CCCU Institutions AICUO Carnegie: Master'sM

0

15

30

45

60


0

15

30

45

60


0

15

30

45

60



Academic Challenge: First-year students (continued)



%

4b. 77

4c. 74

4d. 76

4e. 68


2a. 62

2b. 53

47

2d. 69

72

2f. 60

2g. 78

Learning Strategies

9a. 79

9b. 60

9c. 60


51

37

6c. 36

CCCU

Institutions AICUO

Carnegie:

Master's M

Percentage responding "Very much" or "Quite a bit" about how much coursework emphasized…


Malone University

The table below displays how your students responded to each EI item, and the difference, in percentage points, between your

students and those of your comparison group. Blue bars indicate how much higher your institution's percentage is from that of the

comparison group. Dark red bars indicate how much lower your institution's percentage is from that of the comparison group.

Percentage point difference a between your FY students and

Malone

Applying facts, theories, or methods to practical problems or new situations

Analyzing an idea, experience, or line of reasoning in depth by examining its parts

Evaluating a point of view, decision, or information source

+15 +8 +10

Percentage of students who responded that they "Very often" or "Often"…

+2 +2 +0Forming a new idea or understanding from various pieces of information

Combined ideas from different courses when completing assignments

+8 +11 +6

+10 +3 +8

+3 +4+6

2c.Included diverse perspectives (political, religious, racial/ethnic, gender, etc.) in course

discussions or assignments

+3 +4 +3

-5 -4 -3

+5 +6 +7

Connected your learning to societal problems or issues

Examined the strengths and weaknesses of your own views on a topic or issue

+1 +1 +4

2e.Tried to better understand someone else's views by imagining how an issue looks from his

or her perspective

-7 -8 -5Learned something that changed the way you understand an issue or concept

Connected ideas from your courses to your prior experiences and knowledge

+1 +4 +5



-0 -2 -4

+5 +3 +5

-4 -5 -9

Identified key information from reading assignments

Reviewed your notes after class

Summarized what you learned in class or from course materials

Notes: Refer to your Frequencies and Statistical Comparisons report for full distributions and significance tests. Item numbering corresponds to the survey facsimile included in your

Institutional Report and available on the NSSE website.

a. Percentage point difference = Institution percentage – Comparison group percentage. Because results are rounded to whole numbers, differences of less than 1 point may or may not

display a bar. Small, but nonzero differences may be represented as +0 or -0.

6b.Used numerical information to examine a real-world problem or issue (unemployment,

climate change, public health, etc.)

+3 -1 -2

6a.Reached conclusions based on your own analysis of numerical information (numbers,

graphs, statistics, etc.)+6 -1 -1

+3 +1 -1

Evaluated what others have concluded from numerical information


Academic Challenge: Seniors

Mean Comparisons




Learning Strategies

Quantitative Reasoning **

Score Distributions

Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard



25.4 26.4 -.06 28.4 -.19 29.3 -.25

Notes: Each box-and-whiskers chart plots the 5th (bottom of lower bar), 25th (bottom of box), 50th (middle line), 75th (top of box), and 95th (top of upper bar) percentile scores.

The dot represents the mean score. Refer to Detailed Statistics for your institution’s sample sizes.


Higher-Order Learning Reflective & Integrative Learning

Learning Strategies

Mean

Effect

size Mean

Effect

size Mean

39.4 -.07 39.1 -.04 40.9 -.18

39.0 .08


Malone University

.19 39.2 .06

37.4 .04 36.5 .10 39.4 -.10

Challenging intellectual and creative work is central to student learning and collegiate quality. Colleges and universities promote

student learning by challenging and supporting them to engage in various forms of deep learning. Four Engagement Indicators are

part of this theme: Higher-Order Learning, Reflective & Integrative Learning, Learning Strategies, and Quantitative Reasoning.

Below and on the next page are three views of your results alongside those of your comparison groups.

Your seniors compared with

Effect

size

CCCU Institutions AICUO

37.6

Malone

Mean

38.6

39.9

38.0

0

15

30

45

60


0

15

30

45

60


0

15

30

45

60


0

15

30

45

60



Academic Challenge: Seniors (continued)



%

4b. 75

4c. 76

4d. 71

4e. 65


2a. 72

2b. 75

67

2d. 72

80

2f. 62

2g. 86

Learning Strategies

9a. 84

9b. 58

9c. 62


39

31

6c. 32

+8

+2 +8 +4

+5

+8




Percentage point difference a between your seniors and

CCCU

Institutions AICUO

Carnegie:

Master's M

Percentage responding "Very much" or "Quite a bit" about how much coursework emphasized…

Evaluating a point of view, decision, or information source

Forming a new idea or understanding from various pieces of information

-1 -6 -4

+2 +2 -1

-0

Applying facts, theories, or methods to practical problems or new situations

Analyzing an idea, experience, or line of reasoning in depth by examining its parts

Malone

+4 +3 +2

+5 -3

-5 -4 -8


Malone University

Academic Challenge

Combined ideas from different courses when completing assignments


-5


+5 +10 +4

Reviewed your notes after class

Summarized what you learned in class or from course materials

Connected your learning to societal problems or issues

Examined the strengths and weaknesses of your own views on a topic or issue

Learned something that changed the way you understand an issue or concept

Connected ideas from your courses to your prior experiences and knowledge

Identified key information from reading assignments

6b. -5 -8

+72e.

+1 +2

-7 -14

+10 +16

2c.Included diverse perspectives (political, religious, racial/ethnic, gender, etc.) in course

discussions or assignments

Tried to better understand someone else's views by imagining how an issue looks from his

or her perspective

+7 +15

-13

-5 -12 -10





Evaluated what others have concluded from numerical information

Used numerical information to examine a real-world problem or issue (unemployment,

climate change, public health, etc.)


6a.Reached conclusions based on your own analysis of numerical information (numbers,

graphs, statistics, etc.)-15

+5

-9 -8 -11

+2 +3 +2

+1 +1 -8


Learning with Peers: First-year students

Mean Comparisons


Collaborative Learning ***

Discussions with Diverse Others *

Score Distributions



%

1e. Asked another student to help you understand course material 59

1f. Explained course material to one or more students 64

1g. Prepared for exams by discussing or working through course material with other students 60

1h. Worked with other students on course projects or assignments 54


8a. People from a race or ethnicity other than your own 59

8b. People from an economic background other than your own 68

8c. People with religious beliefs other than your own 58

8d. People with political views other than your own 55

Malone University

Learning with Peers


+2+7

-11

-3

-1

-6

-10




CCCU

Institutions AICUO

+10

-7





Percentage of students who responded that they "Very often" or "Often" had discussions with…

+9

-13

-12

-3

-10

Mean

Carnegie:

Master's M


Malone



Collaborative Learning Discussions with Diverse Others

Notes: Each box-and-whiskers chart plots the 5th (bottom of lower bar), 25th (bottom of box), 50th (middle line), 75th (top of box), and 95th (top of upper bar) percentile

scores. The dot represents the mean score. Refer to Detailed Statistics for your institution’s sample sizes.

31.3 .26

-3

+2

+2

-9

34.7

37.5 -.07 -.15


-13

+9

-.04

+2

-2

-1

+1

Mean

35.2

36.5

Collaborating with others in mastering difficult material and developing interpersonal and social competence prepare students to

deal with complex, unscripted problems they will encounter during and after college. Two Engagement Indicators make up this

theme: Collaborative Learning and Discussions with Diverse Others. Below are three views of your results alongside those of

your comparison groups.

Your first-year students compared with

CCCU Institutions AICUO Carnegie: Master's MMalone

40.238.7

.03

-.23

35.7

Effect

sizeMean

Effect

size Mean

Effect

size

0

15

30

45

60


0

15

30

45

60



Learning with Peers: Seniors

Mean Comparisons




Score Distributions



%

1e. Asked another student to help you understand course material 43

1f. Explained course material to one or more students 56

1g. Prepared for exams by discussing or working through course material with other students 53

1h. Worked with other students on course projects or assignments 61


8a. People from a race or ethnicity other than your own 71

8b. People from an economic background other than your own 74

8c. People with religious beliefs other than your own 53

8d. People with political views other than your own 70


Percentage of students who responded that they "Very often" or "Often" had discussions with…





+7 -12 -17

+4 +5 -0

+1 +1 +1

+3 +2 -0

-2

39.1




CCCU

Institutions AICUO

Carnegie:

Master's M


Malone

30.8 .19 36.3 -.18

Mean

33.8

Collaborating with others in mastering difficult material and developing interpersonal and social competence prepare students to

deal with complex, unscripted problems they will encounter during and after college. Two Engagement Indicators make up this

theme: Collaborative Learning and Discussions with Diverse Others. Below are three views of your results alongside those of

your comparison groups.


Malone

NSSE 2018 Engagement IndicatorsLearning with Peers

Malone University

-3

Mean

33.3

.10 39.7 -.04 40.7Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard


Effect

sizeMean

Effect

size Mean

.03

37.7

Effect

size

-.10

+4 -10


+0 -10 -5

+7 -5 +2

Collaborative Learning Discussions with Diverse Others



+2 -10

0

15

30

45

60


0

15

30

45

60



Experiences with Faculty: First-year students

Mean Comparisons


Student-Faculty Interaction ** **


Score Distributions


Student-Faculty Interaction%

3a. Talked about career plans with a faculty member 55

3b. Worked w/faculty on activities other than coursework (committees, student groups, etc.) 31

3c. Discussed course topics, ideas, or concepts with a faculty member outside of class 27

3d. Discussed your academic performance with a faculty member 36


5a. Clearly explained course goals and requirements 76

5b. Taught course sessions in an organized way 81

5c. Used examples or illustrations to explain difficult points 75

5d. Provided feedback on a draft or work in progress 64

5e. Provided prompt and detailed feedback on tests or completed assignments 71

NSSE 2018 Engagement IndicatorsExperiences with Faculty

Malone University

Percentage responding "Very much" or "Quite a bit" about how much instructors have…





+11 +10 +9

+0 -2 -0

+1 +0 -4

+3 +3 +7

-1 -3 -0

+1 -0 -5

+6 +6 -4





.1038.7 .12 38.9 .11 39.1Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard


+16 +18 +9

+11 +11 +5

MaloneEffect

size

Effect

sizeMean

Students learn firsthand how experts think about and solve problems by interacting with faculty members inside and outside of

instructional settings. As a result, faculty become role models, mentors, and guides for lifelong learning. In addition, effective

teaching requires that faculty deliver course material and provide feedback in student-centered ways. Two Engagement Indicators

investigate this theme: Student-Faculty Interaction and Effective Teaching Practices. Below are three views of your results

alongside those of your comparison groups.


Mean

Effect

size Mean Mean


25.9





CCCU

Institutions AICUO

Carnegie:

Master's M


Malone

21.4 25.1 .0622.3 .27.32

40.3

0

15

30

45

60


0

15

30

45

60



Experiences with Faculty: Seniors

Mean Comparisons




Score Distributions


Student-Faculty Interaction%

3a. Talked about career plans with a faculty member 57

3b. Worked w/faculty on activities other than coursework (committees, student groups, etc.) 33

3c. Discussed course topics, ideas, or concepts with a faculty member outside of class 37

3d. Discussed your academic performance with a faculty member 37


5a. Clearly explained course goals and requirements 82

5b. Taught course sessions in an organized way 76

5c. Used examples or illustrations to explain difficult points 77

5d. Provided feedback on a draft or work in progress 66

5e. Provided prompt and detailed feedback on tests or completed assignments 77






Percentage responding "Very much" or "Quite a bit" about how much instructors have…

+13 +13 +9

-2 +0

+6 +7 -1

+3 -1 -6

-0 +0

+2 -2 -1

.05

24.8 .20 27.3 .04

39.1 .17 40.6

Effect

sizeMean

Effect

size Mean

.06

Effect

size

Students learn firsthand how experts think about and solve problems by interacting with faculty members inside and outside of

instructional settings. As a result, faculty become role models, mentors, and guides for lifelong learning. In addition, effective

teaching requires that faculty deliver course material and provide feedback in student-centered ways. Two Engagement Indicators

investigate this theme: Student-Faculty Interaction and Effective Teaching Practices. Below are three views of your results

alongside those of your comparison groups.


NSSE 2018 Engagement IndicatorsExperiences with Faculty

Malone University

-1 -1

+1


Student-Faculty Interaction Effective Teaching Practices



+10 +5 +6

Mean

26.9

.17Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard


Mean

27.9

41.4

Malone

-2

39.1




CCCU

Institutions AICUO

Carnegie:

Master's M


Malone

+4 +4 +3

+5

0

15

30

45

60


0

15

30

45

60



Campus Environment: First-year students

Mean Comparisons


Quality of Interactions **


Score Distributions


Quality of Interactions%

13a. Students 60

13b. Academic advisors 64

13c. Faculty 60

13d. Student services staff (career services, student activities, housing, etc.) 49

13e. Other administrative staff and offices (registrar, financial aid, etc.) 53


14b. Providing support to help students succeed academically 80

14c. Using learning support services (tutoring services, writing center, etc.) 75

14d. Encouraging contact among students from diff. backgrounds (soc., racial/eth., relig., etc.) 54

14e. Providing opportunities to be involved socially 76

14f. Providing support for your overall well-being (recreation, health care, counseling, etc.) 70

14g. Helping you manage your non-academic responsibilities (work, family, etc.) 44

14h. Attending campus activities and events (performing arts, athletic events, etc.) 73

14i. Attending events that address important social, economic, or political issues 61





Percentage responding "Very much" or "Quite a bit" about how much the institution emphasized…

+4 +7 +4

+14 +9 +9

+1 -0 +1

+4 +4 -2

-8 -8 -8

+5 +3 +4

+3 +8 +7

-3 -3 -5

+1 -3 -0


Malone



43.0 .24

36.3 .10 36.7 .08 37.2 .03

44.1 .14 43.9 .1845.8

Students benefit and are more satisfied in supportive settings that cultivate positive relationships among students, faculty, and

staff. Two Engagement Indicators investigate this theme: Quality of Interactions and Supportive Environment. Below are three

views of your results alongside those of your comparison groups.


NSSE 2018 Engagement IndicatorsCampus Environment

Malone University

-0



+3 +3 +10

+8 +11 +9

+2 +2

Percentage rating their interactions a 6 or 7 (on a scale from 1="Poor" to 7="Excellent") with…




CCCU

Institutions AICUO

Carnegie:

Master's M


37.6

Malone

+2 +5 +5

Effect

sizeMean

Effect

size Mean

Effect

size MeanMean



0

15

30

45

60


0

15

30

45

60



Campus Environment: Seniors

Mean Comparisons


Quality of Interactions *


Score Distributions


Quality of Interactions%

13a. Students 60

13b. Academic advisors 58

13c. Faculty 65

13d. Student services staff (career services, student activities, housing, etc.) 37

13e. Other administrative staff and offices (registrar, financial aid, etc.) 52


14b. Providing support to help students succeed academically 76

14c. Using learning support services (tutoring services, writing center, etc.) 66

14d. Encouraging contact among students from diff. backgrounds (soc., racial/eth., relig., etc.) 51

14e. Providing opportunities to be involved socially 66

14f. Providing support for your overall well-being (recreation, health care, counseling, etc.) 69

14g. Helping you manage your non-academic responsibilities (work, family, etc.) 37

14h. Attending campus activities and events (performing arts, athletic events, etc.) 64

14i. Attending events that address important social, economic, or political issues 57

Percentage responding "Very much" or "Quite a bit" about how much the institution emphasized…

+17 +12 +14

+7 +4

+7 +10 +13

-1 -5

-1 -4 -3

-4

Percentage rating their interactions a 6 or 7 (on a scale from 1="Poor" to 7="Excellent") with…

32.7

43.9 .11 42.2








43.9 .11

.12

NSSE 2018 Engagement IndicatorsCampus Environment

Malone University

Quality of Interactions Supportive Environment

Students benefit and are more satisfied in supportive settings that cultivate positive relationships among students, faculty, and

staff. Two Engagement Indicators investigate this theme: Quality of Interactions and Supportive Environment. Below are three

views of your results alongside those of your comparison groups.


Malone CCCU Institutions AICUO Carnegie: Master's M

Mean

Effect

size

32.5 .13

.27

Mean

45.2

34.3 33.0 .10

Mean

Effect

size Mean

Effect

size

CCCU

Institutions AICUO

Carnegie:

Master's M


Malone

+1

-8 +0 -7

+6+2 +10

+2 +5 -1

+0 +3

+3 +12 +5

+3 +2 +3

+5

-2 -0 +2

+6 +8 +13





0

15

30

45

60


0

15

30

45

60



This page intentionally left blank.


Comparisons with Top 50% and Top 10% Institutions

First-Year Students

✓ ✓

Higher-Order Learning ✓ ✓

Reflective and Integrative Learning ✓ **

Learning Strategies **

Quantitative Reasoning *

Collaborative Learning ✓

Discussions with Diverse Others *** ***

Student-Faculty Interaction ✓ ✓

Effective Teaching Practices ✓

Quality of Interactions ✓ ✓

Supportive Environment ✓

Seniors

✓ ✓

Higher-Order Learning * **

Reflective and Integrative Learning ✓

Learning Strategies **

Quantitative Reasoning *** ***

Collaborative Learning **

Discussions with Diverse Others **

Student-Faculty Interaction ✓ ***

Effective Teaching Practices ✓

Quality of Interactions ✓

Supportive Environment ✓

Comparisons with High-Performing Institutions

Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); Effect size: Mean difference divided by the pooled standard

deviation; *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001 (2-tailed).

a. Precision-weighted means (produced by Hierarchical Linear Modeling) were used to determine the top 50% and top 10% institutions for each Engagement Indicator from all NSSE 2017

and 2018 institutions, separately by class. Using this method, Engagement Indicator scores of institutions with relatively large standard errors were adjusted toward the mean of all

students, while those with smaller standard errors received smaller corrections. As a result, schools with less stable data—even those with high average scores—may not be among

the top scorers. NSSE does not publish the names of the top 50% and top 10% institutions because of our commitment not to release institutional results and our policy against

ranking institutions.

b. Check marks are assigned to comparisons that are either significant and positive, or non-significant with an effect size > -.10.

NSSE Top 50% NSSE Top 10%

NSSE Top 50% NSSE Top 10%



Malone

Malone

Mean

39.435.537.926.6

45.234.3

38.025.4

33.839.1

42.5 -.2841.1 -.10

Mean

41.9

29.241.1

40.2

41.339.6

42.3 -.3132.7 -.46

38.1 -.32

Mean Effect size

46.5 -.1036.4 -.15

43.8 -.30

33.3 -.3443.1 -.13

42.0 -.12

45.9 -.0139.7 -.15

-.24

37.2 -.1543.4 -.47

27.2 -.08

.07

.00

-.33

-.14-.18

-.08.02

Mean Effect size

40.5 -.0838.1 -.2141.6 -.26

-.15

.11

.00

.16-.02

-.20.03

.03-.08

36.535.2

-.12-.13

.00-.33

Mean Effect size

41.435.1

28.7

37.6

Campus

Environment

Learning

with Peers

Experiences

with Faculty

27.9

Academic

Challenge

38.639.9

44.434.3

30.7

35.7

41.4

While NSSE’s policy is not to rank institutions (see nsse.indiana.edu/html/position_policies.cfm), the results below are designed to compare

the engagement of your students with those attending two groups of institutions identified by NSSEa for their high average levels of student

engagement:

(a) institutions with average scores placing them in the top 50% of all 2017 and 2018 NSSE institutions, and

(b) institutions with average scores placing them in the top 10% of all 2017 and 2018 NSSE institutions.

While the average scores for most institutions are below the mean for the top 50% or top 10%, your institution may show areas of distinction

where your average student was as engaged as (or even more engaged than) the typical student at high-performing institutions. A check mark

(✓) signifies those comparisons where your average score was at least comparableb to that of the high-performing group. However, the presence

of a check mark does not necessarily mean that your institution was a member of that group.

It should be noted that most of the variability in student engagement is within, not between, institutions. Even "high-performing" institutions

have students with engagement levels below the average for all institutions.


Malone University

Academic

Challenge

Learning

with Peers



38.936.539.5

Effect size

30.4

24.3

Mean

40.3

43.937.9

Experiences

with Faculty

Campus

Environment

25.940.3

45.8


Detailed Statistics: First-Year Students

Mean SD b SEM c5th 25th 50th 75th 95th

Deg. of

freedom e

Mean

diff. Sig. f

Effect

size g

Academic Challenge

Higher-Order LearningMalone (N = 105) 39.4 11.9 1.16 20 30 40 45 60

CCCU Institutions 36.9 13.1 .21 15 30 40 45 60 4,169 2.5 .051 .193

AICUO 37.6 12.6 .33 20 30 40 45 60 1,541 1.8 .149 .146

Carnegie: Master's M 37.6 13.0 .27 20 30 40 45 60 2,458 1.8 .176 .135

Top 50% 38.9 13.1 .03 20 30 40 50 60 196,850 .4 .724 .034

Top 10% 40.5 13.3 .06 20 30 40 50 60 46,882 -1.1 .393 -.083

Reflective & Integrative LearningMalone (N = 111) 35.5 10.1 .96 20 29 37 40 54

CCCU Institutions 35.0 11.7 .18 17 26 34 43 57 4,402 .5 .640 .045

AICUO 34.8 11.0 .28 20 29 34 40 54 1,619 .7 .506 .065

Carnegie: Master's M 34.7 11.6 .23 17 26 34 43 57 2,626 .8 .458 .072

Top 50% 36.5 11.8 .03 17 29 37 43 57 111 -.9 .341 -.078

Top 10% 38.1 12.0 .06 20 29 37 46 60 111 -2.5 .010 -.210

Learning StrategiesMalone (N = 104) 37.9 13.9 1.36 13 27 40 47 60


AICUO 37.5 13.3 .36 13 27 40 47 60 1,493 .5 .728 .035

Carnegie: Master's M 38.4 13.6 .29 20 27 40 47 60 2,348 -.5 .720 -.036

Top 50% 39.5 13.7 .03 20 27 40 53 60 159,488 -1.6 .236 -.116

Top 10% 41.6 14.1 .07 20 33 40 53 60 38,582 -3.7 .007 -.262

Quantitative ReasoningMalone (N = 102) 26.6 14.3 1.42 0 20 27 33 53


AICUO 27.4 14.0 .37 7 20 27 40 53 1,505 -.8 .588 -.056

Carnegie: Master's M 27.5 14.9 .31 0 20 27 40 53 2,384 -.8 .575 -.057

Top 50% 28.7 15.2 .03 0 20 27 40 60 208,291 -2.0 .181 -.132

Top 10% 30.4 15.3 .07 7 20 27 40 60 50,990 -3.7 .014 -.244

Learning with Peers

Collaborative LearningMalone (N = 118) 35.2 12.0 1.10 20 25 35 40 60

CCCU Institutions 31.3 14.9 .22 5 20 30 40 55 127 3.8 .001 .258

AICUO 35.7 13.4 .34 15 25 35 45 60 1,688 -.6 .641 -.044


Top 50% 35.1 13.6 .03 15 25 35 45 60 217,250 .0 .987 .002

Top 10% 37.2 13.6 .06 15 25 40 45 60 48,634 -2.1 .095 -.154

Discussions with Diverse OthersMalone (N = 104) 36.5 13.3 1.31 15 25 40 45 60

CCCU Institutions 37.5 14.5 .23 15 25 40 50 60 3,996 -1.0 .503 -.067

AICUO 38.7 14.8 .40 15 30 40 50 60 1,500 -2.2 .136 -.152

Carnegie: Master's M 40.2 15.8 .33 15 30 40 55 60 2,358 -3.7 .020 -.235

Top 50% 41.4 15.0 .03 15 30 40 55 60 199,003 -4.9 .001 -.326

Top 10% 43.4 14.8 .07 20 35 45 60 60 44,268 -6.9 .000 -.468

Malone University


Mean statistics Percentiled scores Comparison results

Detailed Statisticsa


Detailed Statistics: First-Year Students


Deg. of

freedom e

Mean

diff. Sig. f

Effect

size g

Malone University





Student-Faculty InteractionMalone (N = 109) 25.9 14.8 1.42 5 15 25 35 60


AICUO 22.3 13.5 .35 5 15 20 30 45 1,571 3.6 .008 .265


Top 50% 24.3 14.8 .04 5 15 20 35 55 123,301 1.7 .237 .113

Top 10% 27.2 15.8 .11 5 15 25 40 60 20,739 -1.3 .393 -.082

Effective Teaching PracticesMalone (N = 107) 40.3 12.7 1.23 20 32 40 52 60


AICUO 38.9 11.9 .31 20 32 40 48 60 1,545 1.3 .260 .113


Top 50% 40.3 13.1 .03 20 32 40 52 60 145,549 .0 .996 .001

Top 10% 42.0 13.7 .07 20 32 40 52 60 37,849 -1.7 .204 -.123

Campus Environment

Quality of InteractionsMalone (N = 104) 45.8 10.1 .99 26 40 46 54 60


AICUO 43.9 10.8 .29 24 38 45 52 60 1,444 1.9 .078 .180

Carnegie: Master's M 43.0 12.0 .26 22 36 44 52 60 117 2.8 .007 .239

Top 50% 43.9 11.6 .03 22 38 46 52 60 118,229 1.9 .095 .164

Top 10% 45.9 12.1 .08 22 40 48 56 60 104 -.1 .931 -.007

Supportive EnvironmentMalone (N = 104) 37.6 12.6 1.24 20 28 38 48 60


AICUO 36.7 12.7 .34 17 28 38 45 60 1,467 1.0 .452 .077


Top 50% 37.9 13.2 .03 15 30 40 48 60 155,142 -.3 .816 -.023

Top 10% 39.7 13.1 .07 18 30 40 50 60 37,354 -2.0 .116 -.155

IPEDS: 203775

a. Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institutional size for comparison groups).

b. Standard deviation is a measure of the amount the individual scores deviate from the mean of all the scores in the distribution.

c. Standard error of the mean, used to compute a confidence interval (CI) around the sample mean. For example, the 95% CI (equal to the sample mean +/- 1.96 x SEM)

is the range that is 95% likely to contain the true population mean.

d. A percentile is the point in the distribution of student-level EI scores at or below which a given percentage of EI scores fall.

e. Degrees of freedom used to compute the t -tests. Values vary from the total Ns due to weighting and whether equal variances were assumed.

f. Statistical significance represents the probability that the difference between the mean of your institution and that of the comparison group occurred by chance.

g. Effect size is the mean difference divided by the pooled standard deviation.


Detailed Statistics: Seniors


Deg. of

freedom e

Mean

diff. Sig. f

Effect

size g

Academic Challenge

Higher-Order LearningMalone (N = 95) 38.6 11.7 1.20 20 30 40 45 60

CCCU Institutions 39.4 13.1 .19 20 30 40 50 60 4,937 -.9 .524 -.066

AICUO 39.1 13.2 .31 15 30 40 50 60 1,950 -.6 .679 -.043


Top 50% 41.3 13.5 .03 20 35 40 55 60 261,793 -2.7 .048 -.203

Top 10% 42.5 13.7 .05 20 35 40 55 60 95 -3.9 .002 -.284

Reflective & Integrative LearningMalone (N = 98) 39.9 11.2 1.13 20 34 37 49 60


AICUO 37.6 11.8 .27 20 29 37 46 60 2,018 2.3 .061 .194


Top 50% 39.6 12.2 .02 20 31 40 49 60 255,319 .3 .797 .026

Top 10% 41.1 12.2 .05 20 33 40 51 60 54,401 -1.3 .309 -.103

Learning StrategiesMalone (N = 93) 38.0 14.0 1.45 13 27 40 47 60


AICUO 36.5 14.3 .34 13 27 33 47 60 1,900 1.4 .348 .100


Top 50% 40.2 14.4 .03 20 33 40 53 60 276,932 -2.2 .137 -.154

Top 10% 42.3 14.2 .05 20 33 40 53 60 74,771 -4.4 .003 -.308

Quantitative ReasoningMalone (N = 97) 25.4 13.6 1.38 7 13 20 33 47

CCCU Institutions 26.4 16.1 .23 0 13 27 40 60 101 -1.0 .475 -.063

AICUO 28.4 15.6 .36 0 20 27 40 60 1,920 -2.9 .071 -.188

Carnegie: Master's M 29.3 15.6 .25 0 20 27 40 60 102 -3.8 .008 -.246

Top 50% 30.7 16.0 .03 0 20 33 40 60 96 -5.2 .000 -.328

Top 10% 32.7 15.7 .06 7 20 33 40 60 96 -7.2 .000 -.460

Learning with Peers

Collaborative LearningMalone (N = 99) 33.8 14.2 1.43 10 25 35 45 60


AICUO 36.3 14.0 .32 15 25 35 45 60 2,068 -2.5 .081 -.180


Top 50% 35.7 13.9 .02 15 25 35 45 60 335,769 -1.9 .173 -.137

Top 10% 38.1 13.5 .06 15 30 40 50 60 55,973 -4.3 .002 -.319

Discussions with Diverse OthersMalone (N = 93) 39.1 13.7 1.42 20 30 40 50 60


AICUO 39.7 14.6 .34 20 30 40 50 60 1,899 -.6 .699 -.041


Top 50% 41.9 15.6 .03 15 30 40 60 60 363,066 -2.9 .078 -.183

Top 10% 43.8 15.5 .05 20 35 45 60 60 92 -4.7 .001 -.305

Malone University





Detailed Statistics: Seniors


Deg. of

freedom e

Mean

diff. Sig. f

Effect

size g

Malone University





Student-Faculty InteractionMalone (N = 95) 27.9 14.7 1.50 5 20 25 35 55


AICUO 27.3 14.8 .34 5 15 25 40 55 1,975 .6 .696 .041


Top 50% 29.2 15.8 .04 5 20 30 40 60 144,579 -1.3 .409 -.085

Top 10% 33.3 16.1 .12 10 20 35 45 60 95 -5.4 .001 -.336

Effective Teaching PracticesMalone (N = 97) 41.4 11.7 1.19 20 32 40 48 60


AICUO 39.1 13.2 .31 16 32 40 48 60 1,953 2.2 .103 .170


Top 50% 41.1 13.6 .03 16 32 40 52 60 226,762 .2 .873 .016

Top 10% 43.1 13.7 .06 20 36 44 56 60 96 -1.7 .151 -.126

Campus Environment

Quality of InteractionsMalone (N = 92) 45.2 9.4 .98 30 38 46 52 60


AICUO 42.2 11.5 .27 22 36 43 50 60 1,860 3.1 .012 .267


Top 50% 44.4 11.9 .03 22 38 46 54 60 91 .8 .396 .070

Top 10% 46.5 12.3 .06 22 40 50 58 60 92 -1.3 .196 -.104

Supportive EnvironmentMalone (N = 93) 34.3 13.3 1.37 13 28 35 43 60


AICUO 32.7 13.4 .32 10 23 33 40 58 1,871 1.6 .250 .122


Top 50% 34.3 13.7 .03 13 25 35 43 60 227,239 .1 .970 .004

Top 10% 36.4 13.7 .06 13 28 38 45 60 46,502 -2.0 .155 -.147

IPEDS: 203775

a. Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institutional size for comparison groups).

b. Standard deviation is a measure of the amount the individual scores deviate from the mean of all the scores in the distribution.

c. Standard error of the mean, used to compute a confidence interval (CI) around the sample mean. For example, the 95% CI (equal to the sample mean +/- 1.96 x SEM)

is the range that is 95% likely to contain the true population mean.

d. A percentile is the point in the distribution of student-level EI scores at or below which a given percentage of EI scores fall.

e. Degrees of freedom used to compute the t -tests. Values vary from the total Ns due to weighting and whether equal variances were assumed.

f. Statistical significance represents the probability that the difference between the mean of your institution and that of the comparison group occurred by chance.

g. Effect size is the mean difference divided by the pooled standard deviation.


NSSE 2018 Engagement Indicators - Malone

Documents

Transcript of NSSE 2018 Engagement Indicators - Malone