LFCC SENSE 09 Data
Dave Urso
John Milam
March 23, 2010
LFCC Entering Student Characteristics
90%
80%
70%
Percent Distribution
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Male
Female
Part-time
Full-time
Traditional
age
(18–24)
Latino/
Hispanic
White
African
American
Asian
Native
American
Other
SENSE09 Respondents
44%
56%
26%
74%
80%
20%
54%
19%
4%
2%
4%
LFCC Students
41%
59%
62%
38%
58%
17%
56%
14%
5%
1%
5%
Benchmark Descriptions
• Early Connections: Strong, early connection to someone at the
college
• High Expectations: Perceive clear, high expectations from
college staff and faculty
• Clear Academic Plan and Pathway: Help to set academic goals
and to create a plan for achieving them
• Effective Track to College Readiness: Ensure that students
build academic skills and receive needed support
• Engaged Learning: Foster engaged learning
• Academic and Social Support Network: Personal network that
enables students to obtain information about college services,
along with the academic and social support
Overall LFCC Benchmark Scores
60
55.2
50.8
49.5
50
47.1
44.2
43.2
40
30
20
10
0
Early Connections
High Expectations
and Aspirations
Clear Academic Plan
and Pathway
Effective Track to
College Readiness
Engaged Learning
Academic and Social
Support Network
Benchmark Score Comparisons
Characteristic
LFCC Benchmark Score
2009 Cohort Colleges
LFCC Difference
Medium-size Colleges
LFCC Difference
Achieving the Dream schools
LFCC Difference
Attendance Status
Part-Time
Full-Time
Developmental Status
Developmental
Non-Developmental
Age
Traditional College
Nontraditional
Parental Education
First-Generation
Not First-Generation
Gender
Male
Female
Race/Ethnicity
White
African American
Asian
Hispanic/Latino
Native American
Other
High
Effective Track
Early Expectations & Clear Academic
to College
Connections
Aspirations Plan & Pathway
Readiness
55.2
49.5
44.2
47.1
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
5.2
-0.5
-5.8
-2.9
50.0
50.4
50.5
49.5
5.2
-0.9
-6.3
-2.4
50.2
49.8
51.1
51.2
5.0
-0.3
-6.9
-4.1
Engaged
Learning
43.2
50.0
-6.8
49.2
-6.0
51.2
-8.0
Academic &
Social Support
Network
50.8
50.0
0.8
50.0
0.8
50.5
0.3
55.2
55.3
50.3
47.3
44.1
44.7
46.9
47.5
41.3
48.6
49.2
55.2
59.5
50.2
49.6
50.0
47.4
39.8
54.4
37.5
43.8
42.6
51.1
50.7
51.9
67.2
46.7
61.1
42.8
50.8
45.2
54.2
43.0
44.4
49.9
54.8
60.5
51.3
53.8
46.3
49.3
40.5
50.8
44.3
43.5
43.0
57.0
46.1
54.4
55.6
42.9
54.6
45.1
43.1
44.8
48.2
40.9
45.2
46.9
53.9
53.6
69.4
55.0
51.6
53.3
55.6
48.0
60.2
59.1
42.2
57.7
52.6
43.1
56.3
34.3
44.6
35.3
42.9
45.5
56.0
60.4
48.5
45.2
47.0
43.3
48.2
47.5
35.8
42.6
38.9
49.9
63.5
67.4
54.3
29.3
40.3
Early Connections Benchmark -55.2
80
70
60
60.5
59.5
55.2
55.3
50.2
50
40
30
20
10
0
69.4
67.2
51.9
54.4
51.3
55.6
53.6
51.6
Early Connections – Questions
1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral, 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree
• The very first time I came to this college I felt welcome - Mean
4.14 - 33.3% strongly agree (SA), 0.2% strongly disagree (SD)
• The college provided me with adequate information about
financial assistance (scholarships, grants, loans, etc.) - Mean
3.56 - 20.7% SA, 5.5% SD
• A college staff member helped me determine whether I
qualified for financial assistance - Mean 2.92 - 12.8% SA,
11.8% SD
• At least one college staff member (other than an instructor)
learned my name - Mean 3.12 - 33.3% SA, 13,4% SD
• A specific person was assigned to me so I could see him/her
each time I needed information or assistance. (yes/no) –
33.7% yes
Interpreting Strengths & Opportunities
• NSOs are beneficial
• In-reach/Outreach and
new personnel
• Financial Aid Sessions
• Career Coaches
• Internalizing SDV
instructor’s pool
• Advertising in high
schools (football
programs, yearbooks)
• Maximize DE population
transferring in to LFCC
• Creating a One Stop
Shop
Clear Academic Plan & Pathway – 44.2
80
70
60
56.3
50.8
50
47.4
44.1
40
30
20
10
0
44.7
42.8
39.8
49.3
45.1
40.5
43.1
43.1
44.6
Clear Plan & Pathway – Questions
1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral, 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree
• I was able to meet with an academic advisor at times
convenient for me - Mean 3.54 - 15.1% SA, 2.1% SD
• An advisor helped me to select a course of study, program or
major- Mean 3.16 - 16.9% SA, 8.3% SD
• An advisor helped me to set academic goals and to create a
plan for achieving them - Mean 3.02 - 9.9% SA, 8.0% SD
• An advisor helped me to identify the courses I needed to take
during my first semester/quarter - Mean 3.43 - 19.8% SA,
7.1% SD
• A college staff member talked with me about my commitments outside of school to help me figure out how many
courses to take - Mean 2.78 - 7.8% SA, 12.6% SD
Interpreting Strengths & Opportunities
• Intrusive
Developmental Advising
• Being accessible for
non-traditional and first
generation students
that seek-out advising
• Assure students of
resources
– More SDV CCA 8 earlier
in semester
• Address balancing
outside commitments
• Minimize Self-Advising
• Prepare for increase in
undecided/apathetic
students
Engaged Learning Benchmark – 43.2
80
70
60
48.6
50
41.3
40
30
20
10
0
48.2
43.8
42.6
43.0
44.4
43.5
43.0
45.2
40.9
43.3
35.8
Engaged Learning – Questions
1=Never, 2=Once, 3=Two or Three, 4= Four or More
• Ask questions in class or contribute to class discussions Mean 2.78 - 9.6% never, 20.2% four+ X
• Prepare at least two drafts of a paper or assignment before
turning it in - Mean 2.09 - 30.2% never, 5.7% four+ X
• Participate in supplemental instruction - Mean 1.29 – 78.5%
never, 1.7% four+ X
• Work with other students on a project or assignment during
class - Mean 2.45 – 16.4% never, 15.6% four+ X
• Work with classmates outside of class on class projects or
assignments - Mean 1.43 – 66.6% never, 4.3% four+ X
• Participate in a required study group outside of class- Mean
1.11 – 90.7% never, 1.4% four+ X
Engaged Learning – Questions – pt. 2
1=Never, 2=Once, 3=Two or Three, 4= Four or More
• Participate in a student-initiated (not required) study group
outside of class - Mean 1.16 – 87.1% never, 1.9% four+ X
• Use an electronic tool to communicate with another student
about coursework - Mean 1.99 – 39.7% never, 18.7% four+ X
• Use an electronic tool to communicate with an instructor
about coursework - Mean 2.09 – 35.3% never, 16.9% four+ X
• Discuss an assignment or grade with an instructor - Mean 2.02
– 32.3% never, 4.7% four+ X
• Ask for help from instructor regarding questions or problems
related to a class - Mean 2.17 – 26.4% never, 8.4% four+ X
• Receive prompt written or oral feedback from instructors on
your performance - Mean 2.33 – 23.7% never, 10.5% four+ X
Engaged Learning – Questions – pt. 3
1=Never, 2=Once, 3=Two or Three, 4= Four or More
• Discuss ideas from readings or classes with instructors outside
of class - Mean 1.38 – 73.9% never, 2.7% four+ X
• Use face-to-face tutoring - Mean 1.09 – 94.3% never, 0.7%
four+ X
• Use writing, math or other skill lab - Mean 1.21 – 87.6% never,
2.9% four+ X
• Use computer lab - Mean 1.58 – 64.0% never, 9.0% four+ X
Interpreting Strengths & Opportunities
• SLC
– Resources
– Miriam’s Involvement
• Student Life
– Faculty Supplement
– Clubs & Orgs
• Examples from SDV
– Wooden Nickels
– Critical Thinking Module
– Internal instructor Pool
• CCSSE told us this, also
• Place a greater
emphasis on
engagement in the first
3 weeks of the
semester
Overall LFCC Benchmark Scores
60
55.2
50.8
49.5
50
47.1
44.2
43.2
40
30
20
10
0
Early Connections
High Expectations
and Aspirations
Clear Academic Plan
and Pathway
Effective Track to
College Readiness
Engaged Learning
Academic and Social
Support Network
The Big Picture –
Where Do We Go From Here?
Engage Early – Design
strategic interventions that
emphasize establishing
community and fostering
relationships during the first
3 weeks of the semester.
Promote Individual Attention
– Effectively partner every
student with an accessible
resource that is committed to
their success.
Develop Critical Learners –
Enhance the learning
environment in ways that
continue to challenge critical
thinking and make students
active participants in the
learning process.
Closing thoughts…
• LFCC has committed to doing the CCSSE again in 2011. This
gives us one year to do a focused implementation of several
key concepts and evaluate their impact.
• The graduate student survey must be used more effectively to
gauge the student experience in these areas and give us costeffective chances to watch our progress.
• What is your interpretation and/or plan of action based on
the results?
• Other questions, comments or ideas?