Higher Learning Commission Self-Study: Highlights of Survey Results University Assessment and Student Learning - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Higher Learning Commission Self-Study: Highlights of Survey Results University Assessment and Student Learning PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 5480a6-YjhhZ



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Higher Learning Commission Self-Study: Highlights of Survey Results University Assessment and Student Learning

Description:

Higher Learning Commission Self-Study: Highlights of Survey Results University Assessment and Student Learning Higher Learning Commission The Higher Learning ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:332
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 71
Provided by: AdamSu
Learn more at: http://extranet.rush.edu
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Higher Learning Commission Self-Study: Highlights of Survey Results University Assessment and Student Learning


1
Higher Learning Commission Self-StudyHighlights
of Survey ResultsUniversity Assessment and
Student Learning
2
Higher Learning Commission
  • The Higher Learning Commission (HLC) is part of
    the North Central Association of Colleges and
    Schools (NCA). NCA is one of six regional
    institutional accreditors in the USA. Through its
    Commissions, the NCA accredits educational
    institutions in 19 states.

3
The Higher Learning Commission
  • accredits the institution as a whole, not its
    individual programs.
  • verifies a university has the resources,
    policies and people to offer its educational
    programs.

4
The Higher Learning Commission
  • The HLC provides five major Criteria for
    Accreditation. These define necessary attributes
    of an organization accredited by the HLC. In
    order to merit accreditation, an organization
    must present reasonable and representative
    evidence of meeting all Criteria. In this slide
    show, we demonstrate how the results of surveys
    are used for this purpose.

5
The Five Criteria of the Higher Learning
Commission are
  • Mission and integrity
  • Preparing for the future
  • Student learning and effective teaching
  • Acquisition, discovery, and application of
    knowledge
  • Engagement and services

6
Criterion 1 Mission and Integrity
  • The organization operates with integrity to
    ensure the fulfillment of its mission through
    structures and processes that involve the board,
    administration, faculty, staff, and students.

7
Criterion 2 Preparing for the Future
  • The organizations allocation of resources and
    its processes for evaluation and planning
    demonstrate its capacity to fulfill its mission,
    improve the quality of its education, and respond
    to future challenges and opportunities.

8
Criterion 3 Student-learning and Effective
Teaching
  • The organization provides evidence of student
    learning and teaching effectiveness that
    demonstrates it is fulfilling its educational
    mission.

9
Criterion 4 Acquisition, discovery, and
application of knowledge
  • The organization promotes a life of learning for
    its faculty, administration, staff, and students
    by fostering and supporting inquiry, creativity,
    practice, and social responsibility in ways
    consistent with its mission.

10
Criterion 5 Engagement and Services
  • As called for by its mission, the organization
    identifies its constituencies and serves them in
    ways both value.

11
The University Mission
  • is central to each of the 5 criteria.
  • was updated to reflect the Universitys
    commitment to diversity in its programs, faculty,
    students, and services.

12
Proposed Mission of Rush University
  • The mission of Rush University is to teach, study
    and provide the highest quality health care,
    using a unique and interdisciplinary
    practitioner-teacher model for
  • health sciences education and
  • research, while reflecting the
  • diversity of its communities in
  • its programs, faculty, students,
  • and service.

13
Data Sources used in the Self-Study
  • Multiple data sources were used to gather
    evidence of how well Rush University meets the
    accreditation criteria.
  • The purpose of this presentation is to highlight
    data obtained through surveys of Rush students,
    faculty, and alumni.

14
Rush University Surveys
Respondents were selected using a stratified
random process to ensure the four colleges were
equally represented. Multiple surveys were
created for students and faculty to minimize time
demands for respondents. Efforts were made to
ensure minority students were adequately sampled.
15
Student Satisfaction Surveys
  • Student surveys focused on satisfaction in these
    three areas
  • Academic programs
  • University services
  • Campus climate student engagement

16
Rush University Student Surveys
of responses of invitations Percent responding
Educational Programs 293 551 53.2
UniversityServices 298 551 54.1
Student Engagement and Campus Climate 468 758 61.7
Students were over-sampled for the survey on
campus climate to ensure a better representation
of minority students.
17
Combined Response Rates on Student Surveys
  • Across colleges
  • CHS 16-18
  • CON 27-32
  • GC 7-9
  • RMC 41-50
  • Across ethnicity
  • Asian 18
  • Black/AA 4
  • Hispanic/Latino 2
  • White 64
  • Other 1
  • No response 11
  • Across levels
  • Baccalaureate 21
  • Masters 28
  • Clinical doctorate 44
  • Research doctorate 6
  • Across genders
  • Female 65
  • Male 25
  • No response 10

18
Rush University Student Surveys
Satisfaction rates are depicted in bar charts on
succeeding slides. 80 satisfaction or agreement
was our standard. Typically, such standards are
set lower at other institutions. Rates reflect
the combined percent of satisfied or very
satisfied ratings.
19
Percent of Students Satisfied with the Academic
Programs
20
Student Satisfaction with the Academic Programs
  • gt 80 of Rush students feel that
  • Faculty are knowledgeable, supportive,
    respectful, and ethical have best interests of
    students at heart really care about teaching.
  • Advisors are available, knowledgeable about their
    programs, and aware of services.
  • Evaluation and grading are fair, accurate, and
    useful in helping them improve their performance.
  • Courses have adequate rigor, breadth depth of
    content, and variety of learning experiences.

21
Student Satisfaction with the Academic Programs
  • lt 80 of students feel that
  • The majority of their faculty use effective
    teaching-methods, stimulate critical thinking,
    and provide an environment conducive to learning

22
Percent of Students Satisfied with Campus Climate
23
Student Satisfaction withCampus Climate
  • gt 80 of students
  • Are satisfied with the overall quality of campus
    life, responsiveness of administrators, and
    student support services
  • Feel that their personal rights are honored and
    respected, and that there is an environment of
    respect regardless of diversity
  • Have a sense of belonging to their departments
    and programs

24
Student Satisfaction withCampus Climate
  • lt 80 of students
  • Have a feeling of community at Rush University
  • Have adequate opportunity to interact with
    students from other programs and disciplines

25
Percent of Students Satisfied with University
Services
26
Student Satisfaction withUniversity Services
  • Students were generally satisfied with many
    aspects of student services
  • Accuracy of information provided by the office
  • Accessibility/availability of staff
  • Helpfulness and attitude of staff
  • Hours of operation,
  • Promptness of responses

27
Overall Student Satisfaction
28
Overall Student Satisfaction
  • In general, Rush students are satisfied with
  • Overall quality of their academic programs
  • How well their programs are fulfilling their
    expectations
  • How well their programs are preparing them to
    assume the roles and responsibilities associated
    with their degree.
  • Their decision to attend Rush.
  • 85 are likely to recommend Rush to others.

29
Faculty Surveys
  of responses of invitations Percent responding
Mission and Satisfaction 384 852 45.1
Quality and Faculty Development 384 858 44.8
Assessment and Campus Climate 369 862 42.8
Community Professional Service 639 2572 24.8
Note One third of Rush faculty members were
invited to complete each of the first three
surveys. All were invited to complete the fourth
survey. Faculty response rates were lower than
for Rush students.
30
Focus of Faculty Surveys
  • Program quality
  • Professional role enactment
  • Work environment
  • Leadership
  • Diversity

31
Percent of Faculty Satisfied with Program Quality
32
Faculty Satisfaction with Program Quality
  • Rush faculty are satisfied with the quality of
  • Teaching within their colleges.
  • Scholarship and professional competence of
    colleagues in their college
  • Overall research within their college
  • Students admitted to their graduate and/or
    undergraduate programs
  • Rush faculty believe the reputation of Rush in
    Chicago and Illinois is good or excellent, but
    less known outside of the state.

33
Percent of Faculty Satisfied with their
Professional Role Enactment
34
Work Worth
  • gt 80 faculty feel
  • that their work provides them with a sense of
    achievement
  • satisfied with faculty morale
  • recognized for their teaching
  • lt 80 faculty feel
  • recognized for their scholarship or their service
    to their college, university, community

35
Faculty Role and Career Development
  • lt 80 faculty felt satisfied with
  • Opportunities to develop skills in improving
    teaching effectiveness of student learning
  • Opportunities to improve their research and
    publication skills
  • Adequacy of mentoring for research development
  • Adequacy of mentoring for teaching effectiveness

36
Faculty Development Needs
Note Higher numbers greater need
37
Percent of Faculty Satisfied with the Work
Environment
38
Faculty Satisfaction with the Work Environment
  • gt 80 of faculty
  • Were satisfied with the climate of the work
    environment
  • Felt personal rights are honored and respected
    regardless of diversity
  • Felt there is mutual respect between faculty
  • Have a sense of belonging in their departments
    and college.

39
Faculty Satisfaction with the Work Environment
  • lt 80 of faculty
  • Feel a strong sense of a faculty community at
    Rush
  • Have adequate opportunities to interact with
    other disciplines
  • Have adequate opportunities to form collaborative
    relationships.
  • Believe there is equality in salary, workload,
    opportunity for advancement, and performance
    evaluations. Differences are associated with
    gender.

40
Percent of Faculty Satisfied with Rush University
Leadership
41
Faculty Satisfaction with Rush University
Leadership
  • gt 80 of faculty
  • Are satisfied with leadership at the university,
    college, and department or division levels.
  • Feel administrators are accessible and responsive
    to concerns of faculty and students
  • Are satisfied with their ability to participate
    in faculty governance.

42
Faculty Satisfaction with Rush University
Leadership
  • lt 80 of faculty
  • Feel there is a clear vision for the future
    direction of Rush University
  • Are satisfied with how the University Council
    represents faculty concerns
  • Are satisfied with opportunities to influence
    policies at the University college levels

43
Percent of Faculty Satisfied with Diversity at
Rush
44
Faculty Satisfaction with Diversity at Rush
  • gt 80 of faculty feel that
  • there is respect for diversity at Rush
  • the university makes an effort to recruit and
    retain a diverse student body.
  • lt 80 of faculty feel that
  • the Universitys efforts to recruit and to retain
    a diverse faculty group are satisfactory.

45
Alumni Survey
  • Rush graduates from the last decade were invited
    via email or by mail to participate in a
    web-based survey.
  • The survey had five areas of focus
  • Employment history
  • Scholarly productivity
  • Professional and service contributions
  • Continued engagement with Rush
  • Overall satisfaction

46
Alumni Survey Response rates
  • Based on responses to emails, we had a 28
    response rate (N465). This is in the upper range
    of response rates as compared with other schools
    recent surveys of alumni (which range from 10 to
    30).
  • Response distribution
  • CHS-15, CON-45, GC-5, RMC-35
  • 25 male 75 female
  • 78 Caucasian, followed by Asians, African
    Americans, and Latino/Hispanics
  • The majority of respondents (88) graduated in
    the last 5 years.
  • 13 have received more than one degree from Rush.

47
Alumni Employment History
48
Alumni Employment History
  • Nearly all obtained positions related to their
    field of study have stayed in the health field,
    even when changing roles.
  • Many alumni hold leadership positions
  • More than 33 hold appointments in a college or
    university
  • The majority of their time is spent in practice
    (2/3), followed by teaching , research, and
    administration
  • The majority remained in the Chicago metropolitan
    or surrounding area.
  • Approximately 25 are still employed at Rush or
    within the Rush system.
  • More than 55 work with medically-underserved
    populations.

49
Alumni Numbers of Scholarly Works
50
Alumni Numbers of Scholarly Works
  • 33 have created scholarly works. These alums
    have
  • Presented over 374 papers and 233 posters
    locally, regionally, and nationally or
    internationally
  • Published or have in press over 634 manuscripts
    (29 clinical, 31 research), abstracts,
    editorials, reviews, or book chapters.
  • Alumni currently have another 91 scholarly works
    under review for publication.

51
Alumni Research Activities
  • Nearly two-thirds participate in research
    activities.
  • 45 have served as PI or Co-PI
  • 45 are research consultants, associates or
    coordinators
  • 27 have developed research proposals
  • 10 are pre- or post-doctoral fellows
  • Several alumni indicated they had received
    funding from either private or national groups
    (from 3000- 3 million).

52
Alumni Continuing Education
  • All are involved in continuing education
    activities either at their place of employment
    (78) or through professional organizations
    (85).
  • 16 are currently acquiring an advanced degree.
    Another 16 plan to acquire an advanced degree
    within the next 5 years.

53
Level of Participation in Professional and
Community Organizations
dark green professional light green community
Percent participating
54
Level of Participation in Professional and
Community Organizations
The majority of our alumni are members of both
professional and community organizations. Many of
them have assumed leadership positions within
their organizations. Nearly half reported they
volunteered for various projects and activities
within their communities.
55
Continued Engagement with Rush University
  • Many Rush alumni stay involved with the
    university
  • Attend alumni functions (24)
  • Serve on a board or governing body at Rush (3)
  • Serve on a college/department committee (5)
  • Assist graduates (25)
  • Precept students (61)
  • Give monetary donations (33)
  • In addition, the vast majority indicate that
    they refer prospective students to Rush.

56
Overall Satisfaction with Education Alumni and
Enrolled Students
dark green alumni light green students
57
Overall Satisfaction with Education Alumni and
Enrolled Students
Graduates give higher overall ratings on
satisfaction than do current students. In their
comments, they indicated they realized how much
better prepared they were compared to their
colleagues in the practice fields. Alumni appear
more satisfied with their level of preparation,
with their decision to attend Rush, and with the
overall quality of their preparation than our
current students. In addition, they are more
likely to recommend Rush to others than our
current students. One should note, however, that
these measures for both alumni and current
students are all above our 80 benchmark for
satisfaction.
58
Alumni Overall Level of Preparation
  • 90-95 of alumni felt prepared in these areas
  • Core knowledge of the discipline
  • Clinical practice skills
  • Critical thinking and analytic skills
  • Collaborating with others
  • Working with racially and socio-economically
    diverse populations

59
Alumni Ph.D. Preparation
  • 80 of alumni who earned a Ph.D. at Rush felt
    prepared in these areas
  • Conduct research ethically
  • Manage research funds
  • Review and referee academic papers
  • Write and submit for publication
  • Assume teaching responsibilities in an academic
    program

60
Alumni Ph.D. Preparation
  • Alumni who earned a Ph.D. at Rush felt less
    well-prepared in these areas
  • managing intellectual property rights
  • preparing for rank promotion in an academic
    program

61
What strengths will the Higher Learning
Commission Find?
  • Outstanding programs
  • Competent graduates
  • Committed faculty
  • Satisfied students

62
What concerns will the Higher Learning Commission
Find?
  • Four independent colleges
  • A Faculty desire for more interdisciplinary and
    collaborative opportunities
  • Faculty development needs
  • Limited focus on University assessment

63
Initiatives
  • Five major initiatives have already been
    undertaken to address some areas of concern
    identified by our self-study process
  • Office of University Assessment and Student
    Learning
  • Revitalization of the University Council
  • Faculty orientation and development
  • Curriculum initiatives
  • Office of Multicultural Affairs

64
Initiatives Assessment
  • The office of University Assessment and Student
    Learning (UASL) has been created. It will seek to
    support quality educational programs at Rush
    University and to foster excellence in
    educational practices by establishing and
    maintaining a culture of assessment and
    improvement throughout the University.

65
Initiatives University Council
  • University Council is reforming. They have
    revised the Rules of Governance for the
    University, developed a faculty manual, sponsored
    an orientation program for new faculty, and
    developed a University Council webpage.
  • University Council is also sponsoring forums for
    faculty discussion of the Rules of Governance.

66
Initiatives Curriculum Reform
  • Changes in our curriculum are ongoing. For
    example
  • Rush Medical College is revising the first two
    years of medical school.
  • The College of Nursing is shifting to solely
    graduate-based programs.
  • The College of Health Sciences is considering
    adding some new undergraduate programs.
  • The Graduate College created a core curriculum
    for biomedical sciences programs and is convening
    a college Curriculum Committee to provide
    oversight of curricular issues.

67
Initiatives Office of Multicultural Affairs
  • As part of Rushs efforts to centralize services
    for University students, a new Office of
    Multicultural Affairs has been created.
  • The office will develop programs and work with
    existing resources to
  • assist all Rush University recruitment teams to
    increase the depth and breadth of diversity in
    applicant pools.
  • contact accepted applicants to show the value
    Rush places on a diverse student body.
  • assist matriculated students in pursuing academic
    excellence.
  • provide administrative support to
    multicultural-based student groups.
  • promote a culture of acceptance and inclusion
    throughout the University.

68
Site visit
  • The HLC site visitors will be on the Rush
    University campus April 28-30, 2008.
  • Many faculty and students
  • will be involved with this
  • visit. Please watch for
  • additional information.

69
Closing comments
  • The self-study and our accreditation should not
    be viewed as an endpoint, but as the indicators
    for a road-map for on-going work on our
    university. I appreciate your interest and
    continuing efforts to make Rush University a
    leader in Health Care education.
  • Thomas A. Deutsch, M.D., Provost

70
Self Study Coordinating Committee
  • Lois Halstead, Ph.D., RN
  • Vice Provost and Vice President, University
    Affairs
  • Rose Suhayda, Ph.D., APRN
  • Director, University Assessment and Student
    Learning
  • David Barnett, Ph.D.
  • Associate Director, University Assessment and
    Student Learning
  • William Karnoscak, MLIS
  • University Registrar

If you would like to provide comments,
suggestions or recommendations for the University
after reviewing these results, please click on
this link http//www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?smS
NYZba8qtczcPs7TCtmqPw_3d_3d You may also visit
the HLC self-study website at http//extranet.rush
.edu/hlc/
About PowerShow.com