Student Success Skills

Academic Program Review

2005 – 2006

Committee Members

Mary Verbout, Prescott Faculty Connie Gilmore. Verde Faculty

Marilyn Michelson, Prescott Faculty Paula Fuhst, Assistant Dean, Student Development and Retention

Kim Ewing, Career Skills Program Director Kirsten Adaniya, Communications Division

Jill Fitzgerald, Communications Division Assistant Dean, Chair

1

Table of Contents Page A. Mission, Goals and Planning …………………………………………… 2 Mission Statement …………………………………………………….. 2 Historical Sketch ………………………………………………………. 2 Program Outcomes ……………………………………………………. 3 Need For the Program ………………………………………………… 3 Academic Program Planning and Current Goals ……………………. 5 B. Student, Class, and FTSE Profiles/Trends …………………………….. 6 Student Profiles …………………………………………………………. 6 Course Review Summary ………………………………………………. 6 Class and FTSE Summary …………………………………………… 9 Distance Learning/Non-Traditional Classes ………………………… 10 C. Curriculum Analysis ……………………………………………………… 12 Curriculum and Course Content ……………………………………… 12 Instructional Delivery …………………………………………………… 12 In-Class Assessment ………………………………………………….. 14 General Education …………………………………………………….. 14 Other Curriculum Issues ……………………………………………… 14 D. Program Faculty and Personnel ……………………………………….. 15 E. Facilities, Equipment, Materials, and Financial Resources ……….. 18 F. Advisory Committee and Partnerships ………………………………… 20 G. General Outcomes …………………………………………………………. 21 Student Evaluation of Instructors …………………………………… 22 Grades …………………………………………………………………… 23 H. Student Outcomes Assessment Plan ………………………………… 24 I. Future Trends ……………………………………………………………… 32 J. Strengths & Concerns …………………………………………………… 33 K. Recommendations ……………………………………………………… 34 L. Action Plan ………………………………………………………………… 35 Appendix A …………………………………………………………………… 36 Appendix B ……………………………………………………………………… 40

2

A. Mission, Goals and Planning MISSION STATEMENT The Student Success Skills (STU) Program aligns with the mission of the college by supporting student learning and retention. Courses provide tools for a successful college experience by strengthening study and career skills, promoting use of college resources, supporting personal development, and clarifying education/career goals and choices. The principal students for these courses are those who are in their first year of college and/or those who are considering a change in careers. HISTORICAL SKETCH During the early 1980’s courses were offered under the prefix name Counseling (COU). Courses offered included: College Survival Skills, Tutor Training, Career and Life Planning, Perspectives for Women, Assertive Training, Stress Management, Becoming a Master Student, and Dealing with Loss. Courses were offered on both the Prescott and Verde campuses as well as in Flagstaff. In 1994, the department name was changed from Counseling to Life Management Skills (LMS) since students mistakenly thought these courses could be applied to counseling degree programs. In 2005 the department name was changed to Student Success Skills (STU) to better reflect the nature of the curriculum. Highlights of the past five years are included in the table below:

Table 1-1. Program Highlights Year Course Highlight Fall 2001 LMS 110 - Pathfinding:

Career Discovery • First online section created • First time taught at Sedona Center

Fall 2001 LMS 111 - Career & Life Planning

• One section was part of the Starting Block Learning Community

• Telecourse + internet hybrid course created: Prescott, Verde, PV + other locations

Spring 2002

LMS150 - Becoming a Master Student

• Telecourse + internet hybrid course created: Prescott, Verde, PV, CV

Spring 2002

LMS296 - Internship: Life Management Skills

• First offering

Fall 2004 LMS150 - Becoming a Master Student

• A specialized section of Becoming a Master Student is developed for athletes.

• Service project for a Master Student class is featured in USA Weekly magazine in recognition of Make a Difference Day.

3

PROGRAM OUTCOMES The five most frequently offered STU courses fall into three groups: the two career skills courses STU 110: Career Discovery and STU 111: Career and Life Planning; the two leadership skills courses STU 121: Resident Assistant Training and STU 142: Essential Tools for Leadership; and the college skills course STU 150: Becoming a Master Student. A review of the learning outcomes for each course reveals that although the focus of each group of courses is slightly different, the commonalities are increased knowledge of self, of goals, of resources to achieve goals, and of techniques for working with others. In other words, these courses focus on intra- and inter-personal skills development. NEED FOR THE PROGRAM According to Robert H. McCabe in No One to Waste, A Report to Public Decision-Makers and Community College Leaders (American Association of Community Colleges, 2000), 67 percent of American youth earned a standard high school diploma in 1997. This represents a decline from 73 percent in 1983. Only 42 percent of those students are graduating with college-entry skills. The probability that recent high school graduates who choose to attend Yavapai College will need assistance through STU classes is high. In fact, placement figures from Fall 2005 indicate that 87% of Yavapai College students taking the COMPASS placement assessment scored into at least one developmental-level course. Fifty-seven percent placed into two or more developmental-level courses, and 33% placed into three. The intent of STU courses, therefore, is to help students build the skills and knowledge they need to make wise choices and be successful in college. The courses offered serve as an orientation to college, and are designed to help students learn about resources, policies and procedures; become more aware of their strengths and weaknesses; make decisions regarding major, career, and education goals; and are a means of making connections with other students and instructors. Research shows that these objectives are directly related to increasing student success. Many of our students come to school under-prepared, not just academically, but also socially and culturally. Many are first generation college students, and their parents are not really a source of support or information about this transition. Many of our students are adults who have doubts about their abilities and are uncertain which path to follow. The STU courses provide guidance, support, and help clarify why students are here and what it is going to take to achieve their goals. Other Arizona community colleges with similar programs are listed in the table below:

4

Table 1-2. Similar Programs in Arizona

College Department name

Study skills / FYE courses (credits)

Career exploration

Other

Arizona Western

ORI (Orientation)

101(3) 102(1) 103(1)

104(1) Personal GrowthDecision-making

Central Arizona

CPD (Counseling and Personal Development)

101(1) 111(2) 160(3)

120(2) Assertiveness Stress mgmt Transfer prep

Cochise CPD 101(1) 150 (3) 119(2) 121(3) Stress, Assertiveness, Parenting

Coconino STU (Student Development Education)

101(2)

Eastern CSL (Counseling)

109(1) 104(2) Personal Development

Maricopa district

CPD 150(3) 150AB(1)

150AC(1) Multiculturalism, Money mgmt, Assertiveness, Stress, Conflict resolution, (40+ courses)

Mohave COU (Counseling)

Assertive communication Paraprofessional counseling

Northland Pioneer

TLC (The Learning Cornerstone)

100(3)

Pima STU (Student Success)

104(3) Critical thinking, Transfer prep, Leadership, Team building, Conflict and Change

Research compiled by the National Resource Center for the First-Year Experience and Students in Transition (see Appendix A) indicates that

• 65% of respondents offer extended orientation seminars • 27% offer academic seminars, and • 20% offer basic study skills seminars.

5

In addition, the three most important course objectives are • 63% developing academic skills • 60% providing orientation to campus resources/services, and • 40% self-exploration/personal development.

Nearly ninety percent offer the courses for academic credit while 57% allow the course to be applied towards general education requirements. A final interesting note is that nearly 25% link the course to other courses in a learning community while nearly 24% include service-learning as a part of the course. ACADEMIC PROGRAM PLANNING AND CURRENT GOALS The main focus of the STU Program in the coming academic year is to successfully launch the First Year Experience STU 101. In addition, district-wide coordination of the of the curriculum needs attention as does instructor recruitment and discussion of appropriate instructor credentials.

6

B. Student, Class, and FTSE/Profile Trends STUDENT PROFILES Student Profile Data are found in Appendix B. These data show 59% of STU/LMS students are female (down from 65.8% in 2000). More than two-thirds of the students are white ethnicity and 63.8% are from Yavapai County (down from more than 70% in 2000). Eleven percent of students are Native American (up from 6.5% in 2000). Half of STU/LMS students attend part-time (down from 54% in 2000). More than two-thirds of students are under age twenty-five. There have been slight increases in students under age twenty from 46.3% to 50% and in students aged 50-59 from 3.6% to 6.2%. COURSE REVIEW SUMMARY The following nine tables provide five year-year data on the five most frequently offered courses in the STU/LMS curriculum by location. The five courses are STU/LMS150: Becoming a Master Student; STU/LMS110: Career Discovery; STU/LMS111: Career and Life Planning; STU/LMS121: Resident Assistant Training; and STU/LMS142: Essential Tools for Leadership. STU/LMS150: Becoming a Master Student and STU/LMS111: Career and Life Planning are the only two courses which have consistently generated more that one annualized FTSE per year.

• Only the Prescott sections of STU/LMS150: Becoming a Master Student have shown consistent growth from the first to the fifth year.

• Only the Prescott sections of STU/LMS150: Becoming a Master Student have shown optimal enrollment capacity.

Table 2-1 provides five-year data of STU/LMS 150: Becoming a Master Student enrollments in Prescott.

Table 2-1. STU/LMS 150 Enrollment Summary – Prescott 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05

Number of Sections 7 8 8 6 7 Average Enrollment 19.1 20 20.2 21.6 24.7 Percent Capacity (using 24 class capacity) 79.2% 83.3% 84.2% 90% 102.9%Total Registrations 134 160 162 130 173 Annualized FTSE 13.4 16 16.2 13.2 17.3 Table 2-2 provides five-year data of STU/LMS 150: Becoming a Master Student enrollments in Verde.

Table 2-2. STU/LMS 150 Enrollment Summary – Verde 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 Number of Sections 4 2 6 2 2 Average Enrollment 13.8 16.5 7.8 19 16 Percent Capacity (using 24 class capacity) 57.5% 68.7% 32.6% 79.1% 66.7%Total Registrations 55 33 47 38 32 Annualized FTSE 5.5 3.3 4.7 3.8 3.2

7

Table 2-3 provides five-year data of STU/LMS 110: Career Discovery enrollments in Prescott.

Table 2-3. STU/LMS 110 Enrollment Summary – Prescott 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05

Number of Sections 7 1 2 1 1 Average Enrollment 16.1 10 10.5 10 11 Percent Capacity (using 20 class capacity) 80.5% 50% 52.5% 50% 55% Total Registrations 113 10 21 10 11 Annualized FTSE 3.8 .3 .7 .3 .4

Table 2-4 provides five-year data of STU/LMS 110: Career Discovery enrollments in Verde.

Table 2-4. STU/LMS 110 Enrollment Summary – Verde 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05Number of Sections 2 2 1 2 2 Average Enrollment 8 9 9 8.5 12 Percent Capacity (using 20 class capacity) 40% 45% 45% 42.5% 60% Total Registrations 16 18 9 17 24 Annualized FTSE .5 .6 .2 .6 .8 Table 2-5 provides five-year data of STU/LMS 111: Career and Life Planning enrollments in Prescott.

Table 2-5. STU/LMS 111 Enrollment Summary – Prescott 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05Number of Sections 0 6 5 5 4 Average Enrollment 0 12.8 17.2 15.6 13.2 Percent Capacity (using 20 class capacity) 0 64% 86% 78% 66% Total Registrations 0 77 86 78 53 Annualized FTSE 0 5.1 5.7 5.2 3.5 Table 2-6 provides five-year data of STU/LMS 111: Career and Life Planning enrollments in Verde.

8

Table 2-6. STU/LMS 111 Enrollment Summary – Verde

00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 Number of Sections 4 4 4 3 4 Average Enrollment 14 12.7 13.7 12.3 9.5 Percent Capacity (using 20 class capacity) 70% 63.5% 68.5% 61.5 47.5%Total Registrations 56 51 55 37 38 Annualized FTSE 3.7 3.4 3.6 2.5 2.5 Table 2-7 provides five-year data of STU/LMS 121: Resident Assistant Training enrollments in Prescott.

Table 2-7. STU/LMS 121 Enrollment Summary – Prescott 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05Number of Sections 2 2 0 2 2 Average Enrollment 11.5 12.5 0 7.5 10 Percent Capacity (using 25 class capacity) 46% 50% 0 30% 40% Total Registrations 23 25 0 15 20 Annualized FTSE .8 .8 0 .5 .7 Table 2-8 provides five-year data of STU/LMS 142: Essential Tools for Leadership enrollments in Prescott.

Table 2-8. STU/LMS 142 Enrollment Summary – Prescott 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05Number of Sections 1 1 1 1 1 Average Enrollment 16 12 16 7 4 Percent Capacity (using 20 class capacity) 80% 60% 80% 35% 20% Total Registrations 16 12 16 7 4 Annualized FTSE .5 .4 .5 .2 .1 Table 2-9 provides five-year data of STU/LMS 142: Essential Tools for Leadership enrollments in Verde.

Table 2-9. STU/LMS 142 Enrollment Summary – Verde 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05Number of Sections 2 1 1 1 1 Average Enrollment 6.5 9 14 8 6 Percent Capacity (using 20 class capacity) 32.5% 45% 70% 40% 30% Total Registrations 13 9 14 8 6 Annualized FTSE .4 .3 .5 .3 .2

9

CLASS AND FTSE SUMMARY The following three tables provide a five-year review of annual program summary in the STU/LMS program from a District, Prescott, and Verde perspective.

• District-wide registrations have declined 17% since 2000/2001 with a 12% decline in Prescott and a 34% decline in Verde.

• District-wide the number of sections has decreased from 39 in 2000/2001 to 29 in 2004/2005, with a 16% decline in Prescott and a 35% decline in Verde.

• District-wide average class size shows continues to grow (up to15.2 in 2004/2005) with an average class size of 17.4 in Prescott and 11.1 in Verde.

Table 2-10. District Annual Program Summary

Academic Year 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Number of Sections 39 35 33 31 29 Average Enrollment 13.6 14.3 15.0 13.1 15.2 Percent Capacity 55% 47% 69% 57% 65% Total Registrations 532 502 494 405 441

Table 2-11. Prescott Annual Program Summary

Academic Year 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05Number of Sections 18 18 16 15 15Average Enrollment 16.6 15.8 17.8 16.0 17.4Percent Capacity 73% 40% 75% 64% 64%Total Registrations 299 284 285 240 261

Table 2-12. Verde Annual Program Summary Academic Year 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05Number of Sections 14 10 13 10 9Average Enrollment 10.9 11.8 11.6 9.9 11.1Percent Capacity 47% 57% 60% 51% 63%Total Registrations 152 118 151 99 100 The following three tables provide a five-year review of FTSE in the STU/LMS program from a District, Prescott, and Verde perspective.

• District-wide annual FTSE has decreased by 7% from 41.4 in 2000/2001 to 38.4 in 2004/2005 with an increase in Prescott from 21.9 to 24.5 and a decrease in Verde from 11.7 to 7.8.

10

Table 2-13. District FTSE

Term FY2000-01 FY2001-02 FY2002-03 FY2003-04 FY2004-05 Fall 38.7 43.0 42.9 32.9 39.7 Spring 20.3 28.8 27.3 24.3 16.0 Summer 4.7 6.4 4.1 3.7 3.6 Short 7.2 4.3 3.7 2.8 7.0 OEOE 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Annualized 41.4 46.6 42.8 35.1 38.4

Table 2-14. Prescott FTSE Term FY2000-01 FY2001-02 FY2002-03 FY2003-04 FY2004-05 Fall 23.7 28.8 29.3 24.5 31.9 Spring 8.9 14.7 15.5 14.3 11.8 Summer 3.1 3.4 2.7 2.8 2.6 Short 2.5 0.4 0.8 0.1 0.0 OEOE 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Annualized 21.9 25.6 25.9 22.3 24.5

Table 2-15. Verde FTSE Term FY2000-01 FY2001-02 FY2002-03 FY2003-04 FY2004-05 Fall 9.7 7.9 11.3 6.2 5.1 Spring 5.9 6.5 8.7 6.2 4.2 Summer 1.1 1.3 0.5 0.3 0.4 Short 2.8 1.0 0.4 0.7 2.8 OEOE 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Annualized 11.7 9.5 10.9 7.2 7.8 DISTANCE LEARNING/NON-TRADITIONAL CLASSES STU/LMS 110: Pathfinding: Career Discovery has been offered in both classroom and online formats in Prescott, Prescott Valley, Verde Valley, Sedona, Ashfork and Black Canyon City. In Fall 2001, STU/LMS110 was offered online for the first time and has been offered eight subsequent times online since then. This course was also offered in a traditional classroom as part of a learning community in Spring 2002 and Fall 2003. STU/LMS 111: Career & Life Planning has been offered in a classroom, through interactive television, and as part of a learning community. Delivery has been provided at the Prescott, Prescott Valley, Chino Valley, Verde and Sedona campuses. This course was offered in telecourse format in Fall 2000 and in five subsequent semesters,

11

but it never had enough students to run until Spring 2004. The course was offered as part of a learning community in Spring 2001. In Spring 2004 and 2005, a section of this course was offered in a traditional classroom format in Chino Valley. Since Fall 2000, there have been two or three sections offered on the Prescott Valley campus in a traditional classroom format. STU/LMS150: Becoming a Master Student has been consistently offered each semester in a traditional classroom format and has periodically had offerings in either telecourse format or as part of a learning community. Telecourse sections of STU/LMS150 were offered from Fall 2001 to Fall 2003 but did not have enough students to run. Learning community formats were offered in Fall 2002, 2003 and 2005. In Fall 2005, the first STU/LMS150 was offered in Prescott Valley as an “early bird” session to appeal to high school students. In Fall 2005, LMS150 was offered in Chino Valley. With the growth in enrollments in most online courses, it may be wise to consider expanding the online offerings of these courses. In particular, STU/LMS150 may have an untapped online audience.

12

C. Curriculum Analysis CURRICULUM AND COURSE CONTENT The Student Success Skills course bank contains the following courses. As indicated below, a number of courses have not been offered recently and should be deleted. These include: STU 130-131-132-133-143. College Skills

• STU 070: Navigating College Module .5 cr. • STU 071: College Success Skills 2 cr. • STU 101 First Year Seminar 1cr. (inaugural offering Fall 2006) • STU 150 Becoming a Master Student 3cr.

Career Skills

• STU 110 Career Discovery 1cr. • STU 111 Career and Life Planning 2cr.

Personal Skills

• STU 121 Resident Assistant Training 1cr. • STU 130 Dealing with Loss 1 cr. (delete–not run since before 2000) • STU 131 Assertive Training 1cr. (delete–not run since before 2000) • STU 132 Stress Management 1 cr. (delete—only run three times in last five years

with a total of 22 students) • STU 133 Tools for Personal Effectiveness 1 cr. (delete—last run Fall 2002 with

only 8 students) • STU 142 Essential Tools for Leadership 1cr. • STU 143 Facilitating Teams 1 cr. (delete–not run since before 2000)

Internship/Independent Study STU 296 Internship 3cr. STU 299 Independent Study 1-6 cr. INSTRUCTIONAL DELIVERY Course instruction is delivered primarily through lecture, class discussion, and small group discussion. In addition, as is mentioned above, STU/LMS110 has been offered online; STU/LMS111 has been offered as a telecourse, ITV, and online; and STU/LMS150 has been offered as a telecourse. IN-CLASS ASSESSMENT A review of 31 recent course syllabi from the Prescott campus reveals the following student learning outcomes assessment strategies used:

• Portfolio—2% • In-class presentations—71% • Papers—55% • Quizzes—35%

13

• Exams—48% • Class participation/discussion—48% • Journals—23% • Projects—71% • Interviews—39%

In addition, a variety of standardized assessments are used including: Educational Benchmarking, Inc. (EBI), Noel-Levitz College Student Inventory (CSI), which is part of the Noel-Levitz Retention Management System (RMS) and most recently the Learning and Study Skills Inventory (LASSI) -- to evaluate a number of factors that have been shown to affect student success and retention. A variety of standardized career assessments, such as the MBTI are used in STU111 and 150. The Master Student textbook includes many assessments, including some, such as the Discovery Wheel, which have pre-and post-testing capability. Factors measured include:

a) improved study strategies, b) academic and cognitive skills (e.g., decision making skills, oral

presentation skills), c) critical thinking (e.g., ability to see multiple side of issues), d) connections with faculty, e) connections with peers, f) out-of-class engagement, g) knowledge of campus policies, h) knowledge of academic services, i) improved time management, j) knowledge of wellness, k) belonging and acceptance, l) satisfaction with Yavapai College (e.g., student want to return to this

college), m) evaluation of the course itself: usefulness of course readings,

engagement with pedagogy.

Recently piloted this Spring 2006 in three sections of STU 150 is the “Learning and Study Skills Inventory” (LASSI). Students improved significantly in all areas tested.

• Anxiety 29% • Attitude 5.6% • Concentration 32.2% • Information Processing 11.2% • Motivation 8.3% • Self-Testing 21.5% • Selecting Main Ideas 26.9% • Study Aids 21.2% • Time Management 20.4% • Test Strategies 15.4%

14

GENERAL EDUCATION Comparing the course outcomes for STU/LMS 110, 111, and 150 (the three most consistently enrolled courses in the STU prefix) to the twenty-two General Education Outcomes, revealed the following:

• All STU course outcomes could be correlated to the General Education Outcomes although somewhat loosely in certain cases.

• The three learning outcomes of STU 110: Career Discovery all correlate to General Education Outcome #5: Apply knowledge in a practical way and to obtain knowledge through the practical world; and #15: Engage in self-directive thinking.

• The nine learning outcomes of STU 111: Career and Life Planning correlate to General Education Outcomes #5 and 15, too, as well as, #14: Integrate curiosity into your pursuit of knowledge; #16 Engage in reflective thinking; and even a part of #19: Progress toward an integrated understanding of culture, society, and the world of nature.

• The eleven learning outcomes of STU 150: Becoming a Master Student correlate to General Education Outcomes #5 and 15, too, as well as, #2: Develop effective reading, writing, and oral communication skills; #21: Be aware of, involved in, and committed to community, and #22: Incorporate an element of humanitarianism into your pursuit of knowledge by showing understanding of the plight or difficulties of others.

OTHER CURRICULUM ISSUES There are currently four college skills courses in the STU prefix: 070,071,101, and 150. These courses are designed for students entering college at various skill levels. It may be wise to review the scope, sequence, and numbering of these courses and perhaps consider development of a course for students nearing graduation, transfer, or employment. In addition, pairings of these courses with other discipline specific courses may be a way to increase their appeal to students. There is overlap in the course outlines of STU 110 and 111 with the former being a one credit class and the latter being a two credit class. It may be wise to consolidate all offerings of this type of course into STU 111 as this is the more popular course. Careful consideration should be given to all courses loosely grouped into the personal skills category. Most have not been offered for years and should be deleted from the course bank. However, the two remaining courses, STU 121: Resident Assistant Training and STU 142: Tools for Effective Leadership generate so little FTSE that a careful cost/benefit analysis should be done to determine their continued viability.

15

D. Program Faculty and Personnel

Until Fall 2003, courses were taught primarily by full-time advisors in the Advising/Counseling Department as part of their regular work load, or if they taught the courses after normal work hours, they taught and were paid as adjunct instructors. (One exception is the Learning Center / Student Support Services instructional position that existed during the 1980’s and early 1990’s. This instructor taught the developmental College Survival Skills class.) From Spring 2004 to Spring 2006, advisors could teach courses only during non-regular work hours and be paid as adjuncts. Starting Fall 2006, advisors again have the option to teach a STU course as part of their regular work load, but few opt to do this due to other position responsibilities. Staffing STU courses remains a challenge. All faculty in this department are adjunct instructors although most are also full-time staff. Most STU instructors have at least a Master’s degree in Counseling or a related field. Most have had additional training, such as Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) training for those teaching the Career classes, or the multiple day Houghton-Mifflin instructor training workshops for the Master Student class.

STU is housed within the Communications Division on the Prescott campus, led by Communications Division Assistant Dean, Jill Fitzgerald and in Division I on the Verde Valley campus led by Terence Pratt, Division I Assistant Dean. Jill Fitzgerald holds an M.A. in English Education from Prescott College and a B.A. in English from Whitman College. Terence Pratt holds an M.A. in English from Mississippi State University and a B.S. in English from Lyndon State College.

Coordination of the Prescott program (except for the STU111 which is part of the Career Skills program) and supervision of the faculty is done by the Assistant Dean of Student Development and Retention, Paula Fuhst. Paula Fuhst holds an M.Ed. in Counseling and Guidance from University of Arizona and B.S. in Secondary Education and French from State University College of New York.

The program also receives administrative support from Kirsten Adaniya and Teresa Schwickerath, Instructional Division Assistant III on Prescott and Verde Valley campuses respectively. The following table lists all program instructors.

16

Table 4-1. Program Faculty Summary Instructor/ Classification/ Teaching Experience/ Years at YC

Degree/ Additional Training

Credential Documentation

Michael Brown Full-time Staff 16/2.5

PSY. D.; MA, Counseling Psych. MBTI

12/03; Life Management Skills, Psychology

Paula Fuhst Full-time Staff 15/25

UA: MA in Education, Major: Counseling & Guidance State University College, New York: BS, French/ Master Student instructor training

8/85 Special – Counseling & French

Barbara Gardner Part-time Staff 10/11

University of Arizona: BA and MA in English; Prescott College: MA, Counseling/Psychology Master Student instructor training, MBTI

3/96 Special – English, Psychology/Counseling

Connie Gilmore Full-time Faculty ?/5

University of Wyoming: BA, Elementary Education; MS, Instructional Technology; Colorado State University: BA, English; MA History

8/01 Regular (expires: May 31, 2008) – English, Basic Education, AZ Community College Certificate – Life – History, Library Science

Lindsay Henning Full-time Staff 1/1

University of Phoenix: MA, Education, Distance Education; National-Louis University: BS, Business Management

9/05; STU 110 & 111 only ; BSA & CSA

Jim Hutchison Full-time Staff 1.5/1.5

Seattle Pacific University: BA, Business Administration; Northern Arizona University: MA, Education, Counseling

Life – Business Administration, Psychology/Counseling; Credentialed to teach LMS/STU

17

Table 4-1. Program Faculty Summary (con’t) Instructor/ Classification/ Teaching Experience/ Years at YC

Degree/ Additional Training

Credential Documentation

Helen Mastor Full-time Staff 5/5.5

California State University, Northridge: MA, Educational Psychology, Counseling and Guidance; University of California, Los Angeles: BA, Music

9/00 Special – Psychology/Counseling, Music

Marilyn Michelson Part-time Faculty 1/10

SanDiegoState University:MS, Counseling; BA, English, MasterStudent Instructor training

4/96 Special – English, Counseling

Russ Roberts Full-time Faculty 5/23

University of Phoenix: MBA; New Mexico State University: BA, Business AdministrationMaster Student instructor training

8/82 Life - Computer Science – Business

Tania Sheldahl Full-time Staff 4/20

NorthernArizona University:MA, Counseling,BS, Business Administration Management MBTI, CAPT training

1/97Special – Counseling, Business Administration/Management

Becca Stein Full-time Staff 1/10

M. Ed. Master Student instructor training

3/06 AED, STU

Doug Terry Full-time Staff 9/9.5

M. Ed. Master Student instructor training

12/96 STU

Liz Winney Part-time Staff 5/20

Northern Arizona University: M. Ed – Educational Leadership; University of Phoenix, BS, Business Master Student Instructor training

2/98, Special: Business, Educational Leadership, Human Development

18

E. Facilities, Equipment, Materials, and Financial Resources The primary delivery method for STU courses is the traditional classroom format. However, to meet the demands of students, some courses have been offered in online and ITV format, not exceeding more than three courses per semester thus far. For the traditional courses, many use the current “smart classroom” technology. In Fall 2006, STU101 will operate primarily in computer classrooms to use internet resources as part of the coursework. Several instructors who teach STU150 and STU111 have also regularly requested computer classrooms. However, due to limited availability in the computer classrooms, these requests have only been met approximately 70% of the time. The online courses have been supported through the TELS group for Blackboard software support. Currently, one instructor will require additional training as part of the new Blackboard training requirement for the college. For the current 2005-2006 fiscal year, no funds for expenses are specifically allocated to the STU program. However, a small amount of expense money was requested for ordering “True Colors” booklets and assessment tools beginning in the 2003-2004 academic year. Course fees have been implemented for the Fall 2006 to offset these costs for the next academic year. The Academic Advising budget has purchased Master Student videos. Residence hall staff who teach STU/LMS 121: Resident Assistant Training do so as part of their full-time position. A free training for the STU150 course is available from the textbook publisher. However, associated travel, food, and lodging costs are not allocated in either the Communications or Division I budgets, and these expenses have instead been paid from the Advising budget. STU adjunct salaries and supplies come from the Communications Division budget on the Prescott Campus and the Division I budget on Verde. Since there are no full-time STU faculty (although full-time faculty from other disciplines have taught and continue to teach the courses), all salaries are paid at the adjunct pay rate. Some full-time academic advisors teach a class as part of their regular work load, but most have taught outside their regular work hours as adjunct faculty. Historically, adjunct salaries have been the only major expense applied to these accounts. The table below summarizes these expenses. No indirect costs are included.

19

Annual Program Summary

Academic Year 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Number of Sections 39 35 33 31 29Average Enrollment 13.6 14.3 15.0 13.1 15.2Percent Capacity 55% 47% 69% 57% 65%Total Registrations 532 502 494 405 441Total adjunct pay/ Fiscal Year:

$ 12,348.56

$12,770.33

$10,580.26

$ 19,140.81

$12,744.87

Total Expenses/ Fiscal Year:

$ 214.92 $ 225.61

Total Fiscal Year $:

$ 12,348.56

$12,770.33

$10,580.26

$ 19,355.73

$12,970.48

Average Cost/Student:

$ 23.21 $ 25.44 $ 21.42

$ 47.26 $ 28.90

20

F. Advisory Committee and Partnerships (none)

21

G. General Outcomes

Student Evaluation of Instructors The standard Institutional Research course evaluation form is used in the STU courses. The following table is a compilation of evaluation results from eight STU150 (Becoming a Master Student) courses and three STU111 (Career and Life Planning) courses. Seven of these sections were offered on the Prescott campus, three on the Verde campus, and one in Prescott Valley.

22

Table 7-1. Student Course Evaluation Results – Fall 2005 Evaluation Question Average1. The course learning outcomes were clearly explained 4.3 2. Course assignments/activities were clearly defined and were helpful. 4.3 3. The course grading criteria was clearly defined. 4.3 4. Course assignments and tests were returned in a timely manner. 4.3 5. The instructor was helpful providing assistance, explanations and answers to questions.

4.4

6. The instructor provided assistance when needed. 4.5 7. The instructor was enthusiastic, encouraging, and positive. 4.5 8. The instructor demonstrated expertise in subject areas. 4.3 9. The scheduled meeting times for the course were adhered to. 4.2 10. Course materials (text, films, handouts) were relevant to the learning outcomes.

4.4

11. Tests, projects, and assignments were relevant to the learning outcomes. 4.3 12. Course instruction was effective. 4.3 13. I achieved what I expected in this class. 4.2 14. Classroom facility and equipment was appropriate (size of room, lighting, furniture)

4.4

15. I would recommend this course to others. 4.4 16. I would recommend this instructor to others. 4.5 17. How much time per week did you put into this class? 5.5

Scale: 1=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Somewhat Agree 4=Agree 5=Strongly Agree The information in this table reveals that average scores for all questions are between agree and strongly agree. The highest averages related to instructor behaviors, indicating that the instructors are enthusiastic, encouraging, positive, and provided assistance when needed. This is what we would hope to see, as one of the purposes of the STU courses is to help students adjust to the college environment, learn about college resources, and make decisions regarding goals and plans. The lowest scores, although not much lower than the highest scores, indicate that occasionally a class did not adhere to the scheduled meeting time, and students did not always achieve what they expected in the course. This latter comment might be due to the fact that in the Career and Life Planning class, students often hope to have their major and career plan all figured out perfectly by the end of ten weeks. Sometimes they have discovered new career pathways open to them and their choices have opened up rather than narrowed. In the Master Student classes, students may not have achieved all they hoped for, because the course may have helped them realize the amount of work it will take to become an “A” student and achieve their goals. Obviously, instructors need to be quite clear with students from the beginning of the courses what is to be expected, but also should occasionally have students assess where they are

23

and if they are getting what they expected, and if not, what changes could be made to help them accomplish their goals.

GRADES Over the past five years two-thirds of the students received a passing letter grade of C or better. The most frequently earned grade was A. Withdrawals from STU/LMS courses over the past five years were in the 25% to 29% range. Students receiving failing grades range from 2% in 2003/2004 to 5% in 2000/2001. Findings are summarized in Table 7-2 below.

Table 7-2. District STU/LMS Grade Distribution STU;LMS Grade Distribution Summary

Grades A B C D F G I P S U V X W We TOTALYear 2000-2001 309 93 51 14 32 3 23 1 2 124 179 1 832Year 2001-2002 301 76 56 21 18 2 4 11 125 191 805Year 2002-2003 276 87 74 10 18 7 7 143 191 4 817Year 2003-2004 217 81 50 11 12 2 17 128 141 2 661Year 2004-2005 234 78 42 9 23 1 2 2 139 127 1 658 A, B, C, D, F = Traditional letter grades G, P = Course in progress, I = Incomplete S = Satisfactory, U = Unsatisfactory, V = Enrichment X = Drop, W = Withdrawal (regular) We = Withdrawal (enrichment)

24

H. Student Outcomes Assessment Plan Although we are not required to be “accredited,” we utilize national models such as the National Resource Center for the First Year Experience and Houghton Mifflin’s College Success Skills instructor training program. We compare our outcomes with others through the Educational Benchmarking Incorporated surveys. With the assistance of then Outcomes Assessment Coordinator, Carol Hammond, the faculty teaching STU 150, Becoming a Master Student, created a matrix of Learning Outcomes, Content from Course Outline, Assignments, and Assessments. Table 8-1 below shows this correlation from learning outcomes through assessments.

Table 8-1. STU 150 Learning Outcomes Matrix Learning Outcome Content Assignments Assessments 1.Use a time management system Know several methods for time management

Time Management

Chapter 2 Weekly writing assignments Class presentations Class discussions Text book assignments Quiz

Tests Teacher evaluation of WWA Evaluation of daily planner Email assignments Peer and self evaluation

2.Apply memory enhancement techniques identify memory techniques

Memory enhancement

Chapter 3 Weekly writing assignments Class presentations Class discussions Text book assignments Quiz

Tests Teacher evaluation of WWA Email assignments Peer and self evaluation

3.Apply reading comprehension skills Identify methods for improving reading speed and comprehension

Reading comprehension

Chapters 4 Guest Speaker-K. Gaffney Writing assignments Class presentations Class discussions Text book assignments Quiz

Speed Read test Tests Peer and Self evaluation Email assignments Teacher evaluation of writings

25

Table 8-1. STU 150 Learning Outcomes Matrix (con’t) Learning Outcome Content Assignments Assessments 4. Apply note-taking techniques demonstrate several note-taking techniques

Note taking Chapter 5 Weekly writing assignments Class presentations Class discussions Text book assignments Quiz

Evaluation of sample notes from another Class by instructor Tests Peer and self evaluation Teacher evaluation of WWA

5.Identify and use effective college test-taking strategies

Test taking Chapter 6 Weekly writing assignments Class presentations Class discussions

Tests Teacher evaluation of WWA Email assignments Peer and self evaluation

6.Explain the components of a healthy lifestyle Participate in healthy lifestyle choices

Healthy lifestyle components

Chapters 11 Weekly writing assignments Class presentations Class discussions Text book assignments Mid-term

Tests Teacher evaluation of WWA Email assignments Peer and self evaluation Evaluation of a health plan

7. identify services provided by campus resources Use campus resources

College and community resources

Chapter 10 Weekly writing assignments Class presentations Class discussions Text book assignments Quiz

Tests Teacher evaluation of WWA Email assignments Peer and self evaluation Reference from various campus resource staff

26

Table 8-1. STU 150 Learning Outcomes Matrix (con’t) Learning Outcome Content Assignments Assessments 8. Apply research tools and resources to investigate majors and careers.

Self assessment for educational and career planning

Chapters 12 Weekly writing assignments Class presentations Class discussions Text book assignments Quiz

Tests Teacher evaluation of WWA Email assignments Documentation of use of career resources Peer and self evaluation

9. Apply effective communication skills. Identify effective communication skills in college and personal settings. Use critical thinking and writing skills

Communication skills

Chapters 8 Weekly writing assignments Class presentations Class discussions Portfolio Text book assignments Quiz

Tests Teacher evaluation of WWA Email assignments Peer and self evaluation References from instructors/counselorsPortfolio evaluation

10. Develop short and long-term goals for personal, career development and academic success.

Decision making and goal setting

Chapters 1, 12 Goals Folder Reading assignment Class activities Text book assignments Quiz

Tests Teacher evaluation of WWA Email assignments Peer and self evaluation

11. Identify the value of community and participation in service/volunteerism.

Community service

Community Service project Reflective writing Text book assignments Final Exam

Instructor evaluation of reflective paper Reference from community service personal

The following two Tables 8-2 and 8-3 show the same correlation from learning outcomes through assessments for STU 110: Career Discover and STU 111: Career and Life Planning.

27

Table 8-2. STU 110 Learning Outcomes Matrix Learning Outcome Content Assignments Assessments 1. Identify interests,

skills, values and personality preferences as they apply to career planning.

Assessment tools to discover interests, skills, values and personality preferences; Occupational options based on interested, skills, values and personality preferences

Reading Assignments Writing Assignments Internet Assignments Class discussions Guest Speakers-Learning Styles and True Colors A-Z List

Assignment completion Instructor Evaluation Participation

2. Use career resources and research techniques to explore career options

Career resources and research techniques

Reading Assignments Writing Assignments Internet Research Assignments Class discussions

Assignment completion Instructor Evaluation Participation Job Reports Information Interviews

3. Formulate educational and occupational goals based on career skills and requirements.

Educational and occupational goals

Reading Assignments Writing Assignments Class discussions Guest Speaker-Academic and Financial Aid

Assignment completion Instructor Evaluation Participation Goals Poster Goals Presentation Academic Plan Career Plan

28

Table 8-3. STU 111 Learning Outcomes Matrix Learning Outcome

Content Assignments Assessments

1. Use self-assessment tools.

Career preferences based on personality, attitudes, self-concepts, skills, interests, and values

Textbook Reading Textbook Assignments Internet Assignments Class discussions Guest Speakers-Learning Styles A-Z List

Assignment completion Instructor Evaluation Participation

2. Identify personality preferences, attitudes, self-concept, skills, interests, and values.

Career preferences based on personality, attitudes, self-concepts, skills, interests, and values

Textbook Reading Textbook Assignments Internet Assignments Guest Speakers-True Colors Class discussions Writing Assignment-Perfect Day

Assignment completion Instructor Evaluation Participation

3. Explain how personal assessment relates to career planning and career choices.

Contemporary theories of the career planning process/Socioeconomic, gender and cultural considerations as related to the world of work

Textbook Reading Textbook Assignments Guest Speaker-Non-traditional Careers Class discussions

Assignment completion Instructor Evaluation Participation

29

Table 8-3. STU 111 Learning Outcomes Matrix (con’t) Learning Outcome Content Assignments Assessments4. Identify career

options. Career options and decision-making strategies/Career research methods and resources

Textbook Reading Textbook Assignments Internet Research Class presentations Class discussions

Assignment completion Instructor Evaluation Participation Job Reports

5. Develop an educational/occupational plan.

Contemporary theories of the career planning process/Career options and decision-making strategies

Textbook Reading Textbook Assignments Guest Speaker-Academic Advising and Financial Aid Class presentations Class discussions PowerPoint Presentation

Assignment completion Instructor Evaluation Participation Goal Poster Goals Presentation

6. Appraise the impact of socioeconomic factors, gender roles, and cultural diversity on personal career decision making

Socioeconomic, gender, and cultural considerations s related to the world of work

Textbook Reading Textbook Assignments Class discussions Information Interviews

Assignment completion Instructor Evaluation Participation Information Interviews Job Reports

7. Use research tools and resources to investigate careers.

Career research methods and resources; Socioeconomic, gender, and cultural considerations as related to the world of work

Textbook Reading Textbook Assignments Internet Research Class discussions Information Interviews

Assignment completion Instructor Evaluation Participation Internet Research Assignment Job Reports Information Interviews

30

Table 8-3. STU 111 Learning Outcomes Matrix (con’t) Learning Outcome

Content Assignments Assessments

8. Analyze current and future workplace trends and occupational outlook.

Labor market information and employment trends

Textbook Reading Textbook Assignments Internet Research Class presentations Class discussions Information Interviews Job Reports

Assignment completion Instructor Evaluation Participation Information Interviews Job Reports

9. Apply job search techniques.

Job search strategies Textbook Reading Textbook Assignments 30 Second Commercial Cover Letter Resume Mock Interview Class discussions

Assignment completion Instructor Evaluation Participation Job Application Resume Cover Letter Mock Interview

During the 1980’s, Institutional Research conducted a study of students who took LMS150: Becoming a Master Student. These students were compared with those who did not take this course but had similar English placement test scores. It was found that those who took the Master Student course attained higher GPAs and were more likely to be retained in college. Efforts at marketing the course were expanded. A similar study was done more recently over four semesters: Fall 2000, Spring 2001, Fall 2001, and Spring 2002. Although GPAs were not significantly higher, retention and re-enrollment of these students was higher than the control group. Results are summarized in the table below.

Table 8-4. LMS150 Retention Study Control Group: ENG 100

Student Retention Enrolled/Returned Completed Cohort Control Improv Cohort Control Improv Fall 2000 106 119 106 119 Spring 2001 88 97 4 75 83 5 Fall 2001 63 66 10 54 53 14 Spring 2002 57 57 13 48 46 15

31

Percentage Retention Enrolled/Returned Completed Cohort Control Improv Cohort Control Improv Fall 2000 100% 100% 100% 100% Spring 2001 83% 82% 02% 71% 70% 01% Fall 2001 59% 55% 04% 51% 45% 06% Spring 2002 54% 48% 06% 45% 39% 07% GPA Improvements Term GPA Cum GPA Graduates Cohort Control Improv Cohort Control Improv Cohort Control Improv Fall 2000 3.07 2.95 0.11 3.02 2.95 0.07 0 0 Spring 2001 2.60 2.66 -0.06 2.82 2.82 0.00 0 0 Fall 2001 2.73 2.87 -0.14 2.86 2.89 -0.03 0 0 Spring 2002 2.99 3.06 -0.07 2.90 2.96 -0.06 5 6 -1

32

I. Future Trends The individual human cost and the cost to society at large for students who are unsuccessful in pursuit of academic/career goals is largely incalculable. Although the evidence collected at our institution is somewhat inconclusive as to the benefit of our bread-and-butter STU course “Becoming a Master Student” (STU 150), nation-wide the evidence has accumulated that college success courses do make a difference in student retention and persistence. As some 70-80% of our students could be termed at-risk (upon entering our doors they require at least one developmental course) to eliminate college success courses is clearly not indicated. The College may even wish to consider requiring some version of a college success course for all students. Many colleges and universities with competitive admissions standards already require a first year seminar or college success type of course. In addition, another primary factor in student persistence and retention is the identification of an attainable academic/career goal. Our career skills courses STU 110-111 are specifically designed to assist students in this area. Since the cost of higher education is unlikely to become more affordable in the future, community colleges have an advantage here and should make use of every opportunity to attract and keep students. STU courses can help.

33

J. Strengths & Concerns

STRENGTHS Faculty. Most faculty have over five years experience at YC teaching the STU courses with some faculty having 15-16 years experience. In addition, with the development of STU 101, opportunities for faculty in other disciplines to teach STU courses have expanded, potentially leading to more opportunities for greater integration of the courses across the disciplines and improved student persistence and retention. Program Curriculum. In particular, the Career Skills Program in Prescott Valley has a strong reputation for assisting the under-employed in our community improve their future career prospects while “Becoming a Master Student” has a good reputation for improving the quality of our students’ college experience. Also, there is interest and support for the development of additional courses and alternative deliveries to expand the number of students served. Facilities. As many sections as possible are taught in computer or smart classrooms thus allowing students the additional benefit of developing technology skills. Advising. Advising for these courses is excellent. Advisors are knowledgeable and enthusiastic about the courses. CONCERNS Curriculum Scope. Currently the program curriculum can be divided into the following broad categories: college skills (070-071-101-150), career skills (110-111), leadership/personal skills (121-130-131-132-133-142-143), and internship/independent study (296-299). Such a broad curriculum scope may dilute program identity. Staffing. As mentioned in the historical sketch, advisors have taught the majority of STU classes but due to other job responsibilities are now less willing to teach them. The net effect is a staffing challenge most semesters with some sections being assigned at the last minute to new adjuncts. Although great materials have been developed for the courses, consistency is more difficult to maintain with new instructors brought in at the last minute. Coordination. District-wide coordination of the program is minimal. It would be beneficial to have a wider discussion of curriculum, staffing, scheduling, and marketing information so that good ideas could be shared. Enrollment. Overall STU registrations are down 17% over the last 5 years although STU 150 registrations in Prescott are up 29%.

34

K. Recommendations The preceding report suggests the following modifications and improvements to the Student Success Skills Program: 1. Tighten the focus of the curriculum by eliminating the low enrolled personal

skills courses. (STU 130-131-132-133-143) 2. Identify and develop strategies to recruit, train, mentor, and retain program

faculty. 3. Develop a comprehensive program assessment plan that regularly measures

student outcomes across all courses and makes appropriate adjustments. 4. Improve access to the courses by developing alternative deliveries and

technology enhanced components. 5. Identify and develop strategies to better market the courses to internal and

external audiences.

35

L. Action Plan

1. Academic Year 2006-2007: Delete low enrolled personal skills courses. (STU 130-131-132-133-143)

2. Academic Year 2006-2007: Begin developing plan to recruit, train, mentor, and

retain program faculty. 3. Academic Year 2006-2007: Begin developing comprehensive program

assessment plan that regularly measures student outcomes across all courses and makes appropriate adjustments.

4. Academic Year 2006-2007: Begin developing alternative course delivery

methods and technology enhanced components. 5. Academic Year 2006-2007: Begin developing plan to better market courses to

internal and external audiences.

36

Appendix A

Summary of Results from the 2003 National Survey on First-Year Seminars

In October 2003, the National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience and Students in Transition undertook its sixth national survey of first-year seminar programming in American higher education. Chief Academic Officers or Chief Executive Officers at all regionally accredited colleges and universities with undergraduate students and lower divisions were e-mailed a link to our web-based survey. Institutions without working e-mail addresses (511 schools) were sent paper letters directing them to the survey website. A total of 3,258 schools received invitations to participate in the survey.

3,258 Survey invitations distributed 771 surveys completed (23.7% response rate) 629 schools responded that they offer first-year seminars (81.6%) Types of Seminars (N=621) 65.2% indicate that they offer extended orientation seminars (n=405) 27.4% indicate that they offer academic seminars with generally uniform content across sections (n=170) 24.3% indicate that they offer academic seminars on various topics (n=151) 14.2% indicate that they offer pre-professional or discipline-linked seminars (n=88) 20.0% indicate that they offer basic study skills seminars (n=124) 8.2% indicate that they offer some “other” type of first-year seminar (n=51) These “other” courses were primarily hybrids of two or more types of seminars. *Note. Percentages add up to more that 100% because several schools offer more that one type of seminar for first-year students.

General Seminar Characteristics (across all seminar types)

Course Objectives (N=621) Respondents were asked to identify the three most important course objectives of their first-year seminar. The three most frequently reported objectives were:

1. Develop academic skills (n=394, 63.5%)

2. Provide an orientation to campus resources and services (n=370, 59.6%)

3. Self-exploration/personal development (n=247, 39.8%)

37

Course Topics (N=621) Respondents were asked to identify the five most important topics that comprise the content of the first-year seminars. The five most frequently reported topics were:

1. Study skills (n=390, 62.8%)

2. Campus resources (n=382, 61.5%)

3. Time management (n=371, 59.7%)

4. Academic Planning/Advising (n=361, 58.1%)

5. Critical Thinking (n=325, 52.3%)

Academic Credit (N=618) 89.3% of schools indicate that their first-year seminars are offered for academic credit (n=552) Of those 522 schools whose seminars count for academic credit: 49.5% offer seminars carrying 1 semester/quarter hour of credit (n=273) 13.2% offer seminars carrying 2 semester/quarter hours of credit (n=73) 31.2% offer seminars carrying 3 semester/quarter hours of credit (n=172) 9.2% offer seminars carrying 4 semester/quarter hours of credit (n=51) 1.3% offer seminars carrying 5 semester/quarter hours of credit (n=7) 2.5% offer seminars carrying more than 5 semester/quarter hours of credit (n=14) *Note. Percents add up to more than 100% because some schools offer varying levels of credit for their seminars. Application of Credit (N=522) 57.3% of schools allow seminar to apply towards general education requirements (n=316) 42.0% of schools allow seminar to apply as an elective (n=232) 6.0% of schools allow seminar to apply towards major requirements (n=33) Grading (N=620) 78.9% indicate that seminars are graded using a letter grade system (n=489) 18.5% indicate that seminars are graded pass/fail (n=115) 2.6% indicate that seminars are not graded (n=16)

Students Required to Take Seminar (N=615) 46.8% of institutions require their first-year seminars for ALL first-year students (n=288) 33.3% of institutions indicate that the seminar is required for some, but not all, students (n=205) 19.8% of institutions do not require the seminar for any of its first-year students (n=122)

38

Special Sections (N=621) 44.8% reported that they do not offer any special sections for unique student populations (n=278) Seminar Size (N=618) 18.3% indicate that approximate class size for their seminar sections is 15 or fewer students (n=113) 36.1% indicate that approximate class size for their seminar sections is 16-20 students (n=223) 33.7% indicate that approximate class size for their seminar sections is 21-25 students (n=208) 12.0% indicated “other” class sizes (n=74) *Note. All “other” responses were for sizes of 26 or more students.

Administrative Unit (N=621) 46.2% of institutions administer their seminars directly through the office of academic affairs (n=287) 20.8% of institutions administer their seminars directly through the office of student affairs (n=129) 15.9% of institutions administer their seminars directly through academic departments (n=99) 10.5% of institutions administer their seminars directly through a first-year program office (n=65) Schools that have some “other” administrative unit most frequently administer their seminars through the advisement office, the Dean of Arts and Science Office, councils associated with the first year or student success, or some joint administrative arrangement between academic and student affairs. Learning Communities (N=613) 24.8% of institutions report linking first-year seminars to one or more other courses (n=152) Service Learning (N=612) 23.7% of institutions report including service-learning as a part of their first-year seminars (n=145)

Instructors (N=621) 89.9% indicate that faculty members teach their first-year seminars (n=558) 45.2% indicate that student affairs professionals teach their first-year seminars (n=281) 6.3% indicate that undergraduate students teach their first-year seminars (n=39) 4.3% indicate that graduate students teach their first-year seminars (n=27) 30.1% indicate that “other campus professionals” teach their first-year seminars (n=192) The most frequently reported “other campus professional” to teach the seminars were academic affairs administrators, library staff, and other staff with master’s degrees and

39

an interest in first-year students. *Note. Percentages add up to more that 100% because several schools use teachers from multiple categories. Instructor Training 72.4 % of responding institutions offer training for their first-year seminar instructors (443 of 612 respondents) 68.8% of the schools that offer training require it of their first-year seminar instructors (302 of 439 respondents) Academic Advising (N=618) 30.4% indicate that they offer sections in which the instructor is also the students’ academic advisor. Team Teaching (N=615) 39.3% of institutions report using teams to teach their seminars (n=242)

Seminar Evaluation (N=615) 52.4% indicate that they have conducted a formal program evaluation since Fall 2000 (n=322) Results of First-Year Seminars (N=322) Respondents who had performed a formal program evaluation since Fall 2000 were asked to select all applicable results that could be attributed to the first-year seminar. 58.9% report increased persistence to sophomore year (n=189) 58.4% report improved student connections with peers (n=188) 51.2% report increased use of campus services (n=165) 50.6% report increased student satisfaction with the institution (n=163) 45.0% report increased out-of-class faculty/student interaction (n=145) 41.6% report increased level of student participation in student activities (n=134) 36.0% report increased academic abilities (n=116) 31.1% report increased student satisfaction with faculty (n=100) 26.7% report improved grade-point-averages (n=86) 18.3% report increased persistence to graduation (n=59)

Age of Seminars (N=608) 8.7% of institutions report having first-year seminars that have been offered for 2 years or less (n=53) 50.2% of institutions report having first-year seminars that have been offered for 3 – 10 years (n=358) 41.1% of institutions report having first-year seminars that have been offered for more than 10 years (n=250)” Retrieved on 6/5/06from: http://www.sc.edu/fye/research/surveyfindings/surveys/survey03.html

40

Appendix B

DISTRICT STU/LMS PROGRAM DEMOGRAPHICS SEX 2000 FALL 2001 FALL 2002 FALL 2003 FALL 2004 FALL Count Col % Count Col % Count Col % Count Col % Count Col % Female 202 65.8% 190 63.8% 202 69.7% 140 63.9% 171 59.0%Male 104 33.9% 108 36.2% 88 30.3% 78 35.6% 119 41.0%Not Reported 1 0.3% 1 0.5% Total 307 100.0% 298 100.0% 290 100.0% 219 100.0% 290 100.0% ETHNIC 2000 FALL 2001 FALL 2002 FALL 2003 FALL 2004 FALL Count Col % Count Col % Count Col % Count Col % Count Col % Non-Resident Alien Black, non-Hispanic 1 0.3% 8 2.7% 8 2.8% 6 2.7% 8 2.8%Native American 20 6.5% 18 6.0% 25 8.6% 19 8.7% 32 11.0%Asian 4 1.3% 2 0.7% 4 1.4% 3 1.4% 7 2.4%Hispanic 30 9.8% 28 9.4% 22 7.6% 28 12.8% 18 6.2%White 207 67.4% 205 68.8% 198 68.3% 132 60.3% 198 68.3%Other 44 14.3% 36 12.1% 33 11.4% 31 14.2% 27 9.3%Not Reported 1 0.3% 1 0.3% Total 307 100.0% 298 100.0% 290 100.0% 219 100.0% 290 100.0% RESIDENCE 2000 FALL 2001 FALL 2002 FALL 2003 FALL 2004 FALL Count Col % Count Col % Count Col % Count Col % Count Col % Yavapai County 225 73.3% 198 66.4% 201 69.3% 149 68.0% 185 63.8%Other AZ County 65 21.2% 53 17.8% 58 20.0% 47 21.5% 61 21.0%Out of State 12 3.9% 33 11.1% 31 10.7% 20 9.1% 41 14.1%Out of Country 5 1.6% 10 3.4% 2 0.9% Not Reported 4 1.3% 1 0.5% 3 1.0%Total 307 100.0% 298 100.0% 290 100.0% 219 100.0% 290 100.0%

RETURN STATUS 2000 FALL 2001 FALL 2002 FALL 2003 FALL 2004 FALL Count Col % Count Col % Count Col % Count Col % Count Col % Continuing 71 23.1% 62 20.8% 69 23.8% 52 23.7% 72 24.8%Returning 47 15.3% 44 14.8% 55 19.0% 37 16.9% 35 12.1%New 189 61.6% 192 64.4% 166 57.2% 130 59.4% 183 63.1%Total 307 100.0% 298 100.0% 290 100.0% 219 100.0% 290 100.0% LOAD 2000 FALL 2001 FALL 2002 FALL 2003 FALL 2004 FALL Count Col % Count Col % Count Col % Count Col % Count Col % Part-Time 167 54.4% 151 50.7% 139 47.9% 113 51.6% 145 50.0%Full-Time 140 45.6% 147 49.3% 151 52.1% 106 48.4% 145 50.0%Total 307 100.0% 298 100.0% 290 100.0% 219 100.0% 290 100.0%