The Power of Partnerships: Lessons for Higher EducationJohn N. Gardner

The Odyssey of a Typical University Professor

Two Decades of Leadership for First-Year Efforts

Thrust into University 101 leadership

University101: a vehicle for the creation of partnerships

Academic affairs and student affairs working together to support the academic mission

Collaborating to define first-year student success

This broad definition of first-year student success is achievable only through partnerships.

Academic Success/GPA

Relationships

Identity Development

Career Decision Making

Health & WellnessFaith & Spirituality

Multicultural Awareness

Civic Responsibility

Retention – the baseline

Key Assumptions

The greatest influence on new students is that of other students.

Learning takes place anywhere there are students, faculty and staff members interacting.

We are more likely to achieve student success through partnerships that integrate learning, both inside and outside the curriculum.

The preeminent goal of partnerships is academic success.

Elements of a Student Success Partnership

A shared vision, jointly developed, for student successShared resources – including personnel and moneyJoint reporting linesFunctional integration; curricular/ co-curricular integrationA willingness to ask for and offer helpA willingness to share responsibility, credit, and blame

Elements of Partnerships

Big picture thinkingA capacity for organizational

unselfishnessA willingness to come together for

what’s best for students, the institution, my unit, and others we serve

A willingness to plant the seed and let others run with it (and even take credit)

Official, Formalized Components

Formal agreements based on informal understandings

A plan for public dissemination and assessment of partnership agreements

A connection of the agreements to the institution’s mission statement and strategic plan

Elements of Partnerships

A willingness to give up something you started when it needs to be institutionalized somewhere else

Getting people to work together who ordinarily would not interact with each other

A decided preference for collaboration over competition

Practical Advantages of Partnerships

More available resources – people and moneyEach unit gets the benefits of talents, skills, capacity and

political support it wouldn’t have on its ownReduces or eliminates unnecessary duplication and waste

of resourcesIs a model of best practice for illustration and emulationTeaches students by exampleStudent success more likely to be the outcome

Partnerships to Enhance Student Success

Academic & Student Affairs Leaders’ Institute 2012

Jillian Kinzie, Associate Director Indiana University Center for

Postsecondary Research and NSSEnsse.iub.edu

Interdependent View of Undergraduate Education

12Undergraduate Education Experience

Intellectual Development

Social/Emotional DevelopmentTransformative

Education

Interdependent View Propositions:• Believe:

– Students whole collegiate experience provides a platform for learning

– Learning is holistic, outcomes cross the cognitive-affective domain

– Student success is everyone’s business• Requires:

– Acknowledging many ways of learning– Synergistic relationships across institutional

divisions– Undo false dichotomies

14

Faculty – attending to students intellectual development

Student Affairs – focusing on students’ social & emotional development

Cognitive Affective Divide

Plotting A Course to Partnerships

Ways must be found to overcome the artificial, organizational bifurcation of our educational delivery systems – P. Terenzini

15

Partnership Lessons from Educationally Effective and Improving Institutions

1. Project DEEP – studied 20 high-performing institutions to document educational effectiveness

a. Project DEEP 5 year follow-up – what sustains educational effectiveness?

2. Learning to Improve – identify factors fostering institutional improvement

16

Project DEEP:A study of 20 High-

Performing Institutions

What do educationally

effective institutions do to

foster student engagement and

success?

Six Shared Conditions of Educationally Effective Institutions

1. “Living” Mission and “Lived” Educational Philosophy

2. Unshakeable Focus on Student Learning 3. Environments Adapted for Educational

Enrichment4. Clearly Marked Pathways to Student

Success5. Improvement-Oriented Ethos6. Shared Responsibility for

Educational Quality

Shared Responsibility for Educational Quality

• Students, all staff, and faculty are partners in educating students

• Faculty & student affairs educators fuel the collaborative spirit

• Caring, supportive community

19

SSiC Follow Up: Educational Effectiveness - Guaranteed to Last?Checked back with DEEP schools 5 years later… • NSSE results about the same – a few

slips, a few gains• Graduation rates comparable, or better

- 7 schools increased by 6%, & 3 by 10%• Six shared conditions still hold

a. Student success is an institutional priority when everyone--especially campus leaders--make it so.

b. Stay “positively restless” – pay attention to data that matters for student success

c. Enhanced partnerships between student and academic affairs

Keys to Sustaining the Student Success Agenda

21

22

1,500 baccalaureate institutions in NSSE 2000-2011600 institutions administered NSSE 4+ timesOPPORTUNITY: What can we learn about institutional improvement and change?

Studying Quality Improvement

Are Institutions Improving?

Yes.

23University of Texas-San Antonio

Conditions that Fostered Improvement1. Grants, Pilots, External Initiatives2. Stability & Trust in Leadership 3. Physical space/creation of new learning spaces4. Comprehensive & Targeted strategic planning5. Data Informed & Culture of continuous

improvement6. Strong role of faculty – impact of generational

change7. Intentional partnerships in administrative

areas – Student and Academic Affairs

Partnerships: First-Year Focus“We have always done a lot to help students stay in college and think about how we move students out successfully.” -- Lynchburg College faculty member

• Low persistence rate in 2005 captured everyone’s attention… formed Student Success Team

• Sent dozens faculty & staff to FYE conference

25

Robust Partnerships Between Student & Academic Affairs

• Change facilitated by a robust partnership between academic & student affairs

Perplexing Question:

If partnerships are so essential to educational effectiveness and improved conditions for learning and success, then why are they so difficult to achieve? Why are partnerships the exception rather than the rule?

27

Exploring Partnerships: Lessons LearnedCharles Schroeder

Context: 1992 University of Missouri

Major Triggering EventsDeclining enrollment…huge drop in freshman class (-29%)

& residence hall occupancy down 34% (6200 to 4100).Three large residence halls closed…debt rating in jeopardyCourse availability / scheduling a challengePoor legislative relationships…skepticism / angerCBHE establishes new retention (R) / graduation (G) rate

standards … R=85% vs. 78%; G= 65% vs. 59% Finding opportunity in adversity !

Compelling Aim

New Chancellor establishes a compelling aim:

“Recapture the public’s trust by rededicating the University to high quality undergraduate education”

Goals and objectives

Restore enrollment and residence hall occupancy.Improve course scheduling through more effective

curriculum management for first-year students.Elevate the intellectual climate of the campus by enhancing

first-year student engagement. Achieve the new CBHE retention / graduation rate

standards by 1998And, by the way, do all of this with limited funding!!!!

Primary strategy: Create a residential learning community program

Three institutional leaders : VPSA; Associate Dean A&S; Chair Biology Dept.

Cross-functional core team: residence life; registrar; English department; admissions & campus writing program

Developed 12 FIGS (Freshman Interest Groups) … three common courses & common assignment to floors.

Initial assessment led to creation of three residential colleges, 87 FIGs and 46 sponsored learning communities by 1999 (“70 by 99”).

Program Outcomes

Achieved CBHE performance standards (G=68%; R=85%)Increased enrollment & filled the residence hallsMuch higher NSSE scores on all five benchmarks70% (4200) of all first-year students now in learning

communitiesLC`s the “signature program” of MU-- 7%+ to graduationGraduation rates of “at-risk students” (family income

<48,000 and HSGPA < 2.75) FIG vs. non-FIG 45.6% vs. 34.2 % + 11.4%

Lessons learned

Triggering events and “self-interests” can be catalysts … focus on issues of consequence!

A shared vision and shared resources are criticalUnderstanding and acceptance of differences are key (i.e.

using and integrating the strengths of partners)Communicate, coordinate, collaborate constantly!Leadership is critical: Think big…plan long term Be flexible…adapt as necessary and take risks Examine prevailing mental models and embrace the notion

“To create the future, challenge the past”