//img.uscri.be/pth/d648f3725eb6a5a14b59fd03dcc177dc155a2212
La lecture en ligne est gratuite
Le téléchargement nécessite un accès à la bibliothèque YouScribe
Tout savoir sur nos offres
Télécharger Lire

UMASS Amherst 2002 Benchmark Report New

De
4 pages
Institutional Benchmark ReportNovember 2002University of Massachusetts Amherst2002 Institutional Benchmark ReportUniversity of Massachusetts AmherstIntroduction The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) annually assesses the extent to which undergraduatestudents are involved in educational practices empirically linked to high levels of learning and development. In aneffort to make it easier for people on and off campus to more easily talk about student engagement and theimportance to student learning, collegiate quality, and institutional improvement, NSSE created the NationalBenchmarks of Effective Educational Practice. They are: 1) level of academic challenge, 2) active andcollaborative learning, 3) student-faculty interactions, 4) enriching educational experiences, and 5) supportivecampus environment. The benchmarks represent clusters of items on the survey and are expressed in 100-point scales. Each year,NSSE calculates benchmark scores to monitor performance at the institutional, sector, and national level. Thisyear's analysis is based on more than 135,000 randomly selected students at 613 four-year colleges anduniversities that participated in 2000, 2001, and 2002. The students represent a broad cross-section of first-yearand senior students from every region of the country. The institutions are similar in most respects to the universeof four-year schools. More detailed information about the benchmarks can be found in the ...
Voir plus Voir moins
Institutional Benchmark Report November2002
University of Massachusetts Amherst
Introduction
2002 Institutional Benchmark Report University of Massachusetts Amherst
 TheNational Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) annually assesses the extent to which undergraduate students are involved in educational practices empirically linked to high levels of learning and development.In an effort to make it easier for people on and off campus to more easily talk about student engagement and the importance to student learning, collegiate quality, and institutional improvement, NSSE created the National Benchmarks of Effective Educational Practice.They are:1) level of academic challenge, 2) active and collaborative learning, 3) student-faculty interactions, 4) enriching educational experiences, and 5) supportive campus environment.
 Thebenchmarks represent clusters of items on the survey and are expressed in 100-point scales.Each year, SSE calculates benchmark scores to monitor performance at the institutional, sector, and national level.This year's analysis is based on more than 135,000 randomly selected students at 613 four-year colleges and universities that participated in 2000, 2001, and 2002.The students represent a broad cross-section of first-year and senior students from every region of the country. The institutions are similar in most respects to the universe of four-year schools.More detailed information about the benchmarks can be found in the annual report that accompanies this mailing and on the NSSE website at www.iub.edu/~nsse.
Benchmark Report
 TheBenchmark Report presents your institution’s benchmark scores and compares them to schools in your consortium.
 NSSEand the National Benchmarks of Effective Educational Practice provide a new way to look at and talk about teaching and learning.Thus, they are intended to help stimulate conversations on campus and may help determine whether student behavior and institutional practices are headed in the right direction.
Level of Academic Challenge(alpha: First-Year=0.76; Senior=0.75) Level of Academic Challenge Items: 75 Challenging Preparing for class (studying, reading, writing, rehearsing, intellectual and etc. related to academic program) creative work is umber of assigned textbooks, books, or book-length packs central to student 65 of course readings (F+, S+) learning and collegiate quality.umber of written papers or reports of 20 pages or more; Between 5 and 19 pages; (F+, S+) Colleges and 55 Fewer than 5 pages (F+, S+) universities promote high Coursework emphasizing analysis of the basic elements of an UMA Doc-ExtNational levels of studentidea, experience or theory 45 achievement by Coursework emphasizing synthesis and organizing of ideas, emphasizing the51.8 53.4First-Ye 53.4 information, or experiences into new, more complex importance ofinterpretations and relationships academic effort35 Senior 54.954.9 57.0 Coursework emphasizing the making ofjudgments about the and setting high value of information, arguments, or methods (F+) expectations for student Coursework emphasizing application of theories or concepts 25 First-Year Seniorto practical problems or in new situations performance. UMASS 53.454.9 Working harder than you thought you could to meet an instructor's standards or expectations Doc-Ext 51.854.9
Key: +/- = UMASS was significantly higher/lower (p<0.05) than Doctoral Extensive Institutions (Doc-Ext).  BoldedForS= Effect size was greater than 0.30, indicating at least a small magnitude of difference between UMASS and Doc-Ext.
Office of Academic Planning AsssessmentzOffice of Institutional Research, November 2002 www.umass.edu/oapa
Page 1
2002 Institutional Benchmark Report University of Massachusetts Amherst
Active and Collaborative Learning(alpha: First-Year=0.58; Senior=0.64) Active and Collaborative Learning Items: 75 Students learn more Asked questions in class or contributed to class when they are discussions intensely involved in their education65Made a class presentation (S-) and asked to think UMASS UMASSSy Doc-ExtNational Worked with other students on projects during class about what they are learning in different 55 Worked with classmates outside of class to prepare First-Year 35.436.1 37.6 41.3 settings.class assignments (S-) Collaborating with Tutored or taught other students (F-, S-) Senior 43.846.3 46.0 49.9 others in solving 45 problems or Participated in a community-based project as part of a regular course (F-) mastering difficult material prepares Discussed ideas from your readings or classes with students for the35 others outside of class (students, family members, messy, unscriptedco-workers, etc.) problems they will encounter daily 25 First-Year Senior during and after college. UMASS 35.443.8 Doc-Ext 37.646.0
Student-Faculty Interactions(alpha: First-Year=0.74; Senior=0.78) Student-Faculty Interactions Items: 75 Students learn Discussed grades or assignments with an instructor firsthand how experts think aboutTalked about career plans with a faculty member or and solve practical65 advisor (F-) problems by Discussed ideas from your readings or classes with UMASS UMASSSy Doc-ExtNational interacting withfaculty members outside of class faculty members 55 First-Year 32.7Worked wi3th1f.a9culty member3s3o.n0activities othe3r6.2 inside and outside than coursework (committees, orientation, student-the classroom.As a life activities, etc.) Senior 40.140.8 39.1 43.5 result, their 45 Received prompt feedback from faculty on your teachers become academic performance (written or oral) role models, mentors, and guidesWorked or planned to work with a faculty member for continuous, life-35 on a research project outside of course or program requirements (S+) long learning.
25
UMASS Doc-Ext
First-Year 32.7 33.0
Senior 40.1 39.1
Key: +/- = UMASS was significantly higher/lower (p<0.05) than Doctoral Extensive Institutions (Doc-Ext).  BoldedForS= Effect size was greater than 0.30, indicating at least a small magnitude of difference between UMASS and Doc-Ext.
Office of Academic Planning AsssessmentzOffice of Institutional Research, November 2002 www.umass.edu/oapa
page 2
2002 Institutional Benchmark Report University of Massachusetts Amherst
Enriching Educational Experiences(alpha: First-Year=0.59; Senior=0.60) Enriching Educational Experiences Items: Complementary75 Participating in co-curricular activities (organizations, publications, learning opportunities student government, sports, etc.) (F-) in and out of classroom UM UMASSSy Doc-ExtNational augment academicPracticum, internship, field experience, co-op experience, or clinical 65 assignment (S-) programs. Diversity experiences teach First-Y 60.754.2 55.756.3 Community service or volunteer work students valuable things aboutForeign language coursework 55 Senior 45.842.7 46.148.0 themselves and others. Study abroad(F+,S+) Technology facilitates collaboration between Independent study or self-designed major (F+, S+) peers and instructors.45 Culminating senior experience (comprehensive exam, capstone course, Internships, community thesis, project, etc.) (S-) service, and senior capstone courses 35 Serious conversations with students of different religious beliefs, provide opportunities political opinions, or personal values (F+, S+) to integrate and apply Serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity (F+, knowledge. S+) 25 First-Year Senior Using electronic technology to discuss or complete an assignment (F+) UMASS 60.745.8 Campus environment encouraging contact among students from Doc-Ext 55.746.1 different economic, social, or racial/ethnic backgrounds
Supportive Campus Environment(alpha: First-Year=0.70; Senior=0.76) Supportive Campus Environment Items: 75 Students perform Campus environment provides the support you need better and are more to help you succeed academically (F-, S-) satisfied at colleges UMAS UMDoc-Ext National Campus environment helps you cope with your non-that are committed to65 academic responsibilities (work, family, etc.) (F-) their success as well First-Year 53.854.4 56.6 60.7 as the working andCampus environment provides the support you need to thrive socially social relations 55 Senior 51.251.7 51.9 57.7 among different Quality of relationships with other students groups on campus. Quality of relationships with faculty members 45 Quality of relationships with administrative personnel and offices (F-,S-) 35
25 First-Year UMASS 53.8 Doc-Ext 56.6
Senior 51.2 51.9
Key: +/- = UMASS was significantly higher/lower (p<0.05) than Doctoral Extensive Institutions (Doc-Ext).  BoldedForS= Effect size was greater than 0.30, indicating at least a small magnitude of difference between UMASS and Doc-Ext. Office of Academic Planning AsssessmentzOffice of Institutional Research, November 2002 page 3 www.umass.edu/oapa