This brief highlights Summer Bridge programs at four Western Land-Grant institutions, including a comparison of program characteristics, content, target populations, and success factors. Summer Bridge programs show promise for increasing students’ academic preparation and social adjustment to college life through a mix of academic support, peer mentoring, and social activities.  It is important to help students acclimate to campus life and promote a sense of belonging and comfort among peers and faculty – particularly for students whose families lack college exposure.

On May 15, APLU hosted the second virtual Data Literacy Institute (DLI) convening. This event was co-sponsored by APLU and the Association for Institutional Research, with generous support from Ascendium Education Group. At this event, teams from four institutions in the second cohort shared the results of their capstone projects, in which they used data to explore solutions to a critical student success problem on campus. Presenters included the University of Maine, Bowling Green State University, Illinois State University, and Miami University of Ohio.

During the second half of the convening, five teams from the first cohort – Kent State University, Montclair State University, Oakland University, Wright State University, and the University of Minnesota Duluth shared how they are developing a data literacy program on their campuses to continue the work they started in the DLI.

Click here to view the video of the convening:

Bowling Green State University Slides: Bowling Green State University — Data Literacy Institute 2023 Convening Presentation | Powered by Publics Learning Exchange (crowdstack.io)

University of Maine Slides: University of Maine — Data Literacy Institute 2023 Convening Presentation | Powered by Publics Learning Exchange (crowdstack.io)

Miami University of Ohio Slides: Miami University (Ohio) — Data Literacy Institute 2023 Convening Presentation | Powered by Publics Learning Exchange (crowdstack.io)

Oakland University Slides : Oakland University — Data Literacy Institute 2023 Convening Presentation | Powered by Publics Learning Exchange (crowdstack.io)

University of Minnesota Duluth Slides: University of Minnesota Duluth — Data Literacy Institute 2023 Convening Presentation | Powered by Publics Learning Exchange (crowdstack.io)

Wright State University Slides: Wright State University — Data Literacy Institute 2023 Convening Presentation | Powered by Publics Learning Exchange (crowdstack.io)

Overview

Lack of access to a proper education is one of the root causes of income inequity in the United States. Education is a key driver of social mobility and holds the potential for closing income and wealth disparities.

According to a blog post by the Federal Reserve on Economic Data, college graduates received weekly wages 80 percent higher than high school graduates. Currently, many students need help with affordability, causing a large amount of stress in achieving an education. High school students who pursue a college education may be willing to take on debt, but many need a full understanding of the implications of their debt or how much they really need to borrow. Furthermore, in a recent survey done by the Pew Charitable Trust, certain underrepresented demographics have a higher experience of default.

Implications for Students

According to an article in CNBC written in 2018, “More than 30% of student loan borrowers are in default, are late, or have stopped making payments six years after graduation.” They continue to face ongoing financial crises without means of discharging their debt. The debt also has an enormous impact on the United States economy. There is a new record high for student debt, surpassing $1.68 trillion for the first time, according to (the Federal Reserve as of the end of the third quarter in 2021). Student loan debt has increased nearly 130 percent in the last decade, when it was at $600 billion (Federal Reserve), surpassing the total credit card debt. (Federal Reserve third quarter 2021)

Importance of Financial Literacy

The lack of financial wellness education contributes to this debt by not allowing the consumer to understand the immense financial obligation that they are taking on. A study done in 2019 by the ACT Center for Equity in Learning found that a dismal 70% of people had no idea of the various student repayment options available to them, and an even higher number of students weren’t aware that the government subsidizes the money and pays the interest on the loans while the student is in school.

Best Practices for Universities According to Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, FINRA, students who have had financial literacy classes make better financial decisions. FINRA found that students with higher financial literacy were less likely to have late fees and default on loans.  In 2022, “Inside Higher Ed and College Pulse conducted a survey and, based on these results, concluded that the best strategies for financial wellness for students included six areas.   Financial aid officers should work with students each semester to build their knowledge, Student Financial Services Counselors must reach out to the students, the financial aid offices should be close and convenient to all students, reinforce spending and borrowing habits, and institutions should offer credit for classes. The Federal Financial Literacy and Education Commission (FLEC)Federal Financial Literacy and Education Commission (FLEC) set forth best practices for institutions of higher education which will have the overall goal of educating students as to their financial loans, the impact of their investments, and what their borrowing obligations are. FLEC set forth five categories to provide financial wellness to students in higher education, which include providing concise, customized information to inform student borrowing, effective engagement with students in financial literacy, using data to target various student populations, clear communication regarding the importance of repayment of student loans, and communicating the importance of graduating and the impact that has on repayment.

Examples of Financial Literacy Initiatives

APLU members have demonstrated an understanding of the necessity of financial wellness education and have worked collaboratively to solve this issue. For example, Mississippi State University requires “Maroon U,” a course comprising six modules that provide resources for financial wellness, and “Maroon Money Mentors,” peer mentors trained in financial health. Additionally, the University of Texas San Antonio Financial Aid and Scholarship Office teamed up with the Academic Inquiry Scholarship Program to conduct budget presentations for first-year students. This provides good financial well-being and learning along with a site created for financial wellness resources and information, allowing students and staff to request coaching sessions and one on one located on their website. These are just a couple of examples of APLU members who are working to ensure a better financial future for their students.

Institutions in the Western Land Grant cluster held a symposium in Fall 2019 on teaching and learning, to prioritize areas for future inquiry and action. One of the prioritized areas was general education reform, including incorporating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) across the general education curriculum. Over the course of 2020, the Western Land-grant cluster explored the current state of general education, identified opportunities for improvement, and shared examples that illustrate progress.

DEI competencies are important skills to help students navigate increasingly diverse campuses and society. As one member stated, DEI courses “…provide opportunities to expand self-awareness, examine perspectives, and engage in dialogue in order to analyze personal and social responsibility, domestic or global systems, and contemporary contexts.”

Some institutions are revisiting their historically white Euro-American pedagogy to increase the representation of other cultures’ histories. Some are also examining their own role in systemic racism and identifying ways to incorporate anti-racism into their campuses or coursework. Many students are looking to their institutions to take the lead in anti-racism education.

Despite challenges imposed by conservative legislatures in a growing number of states, institutions and systems are finding ways to push forward with providing curricula that promote representation and inclusiveness, to help prepare students for a diverse workforce and global society.

Approaches

Institutions in the cluster shared various models for how they have incorporated DEI into the general education curriculum, including two broad categories: 1) Making DEI an additional requirement, or 2) “Writing [DEI] in” across the curriculum. Several institutions require diversity-designated courses that appear in various disciplines. 

Institutional examples

Below are specific examples of how individual institutions have incorporated DEI into general education requirements.

• One institution has two general education categories related to diversity: (1) Cultural Diversity and (2) Global Perspectives, each requiring 3 credits. Cultural Diversity “focuses on the social, personal, and interpersonal effects of variety and differences among cultures.” Global Perspectives “focuses on analysis of worldwide issues illustrating the interdependence of the world and its people.”
• Another institution added a new DEI general education category as of 2020. Courses in this category “engage students in the study of cultural identities, explore the interactions among these identities, and reflect upon patterns of interaction related to the larger contexts in which they take place.” In addition, diversity student learning outcomes in other general education categories ensure that course content meets DEI objectives in at least five courses in the required common curriculum. This institution hired an equity educator into their Teaching and Learning Institute to support faculty development in inclusive pedagogy. A diverse group of faculty and staff develop course templates using common learning outcomes.
• An institution requires one American Diversity course and one international course, “…to prepare students to understand, communicate and collaborate with those from diverse communities.” The American Diversity courses “…seek to increase awareness of contemporary and historical issues surrounding the social and cultural diversity in the U.S.” The institution’s diversity definition includes not only race and ethnicity but also ability, age, gender, religion, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status.
• At another institution, each program is required to include DEI as a cross-curricular skill. The undergraduate cross-curricular skill requirements are reflected in student learning outcomes for the program and must be assessed as outlined in policy.
• Students at California State Universities are now required to take one of four ethnic studies classes: African American, Latina/o, Native American, or Asian American. Governor Gavin Newsom passed this state bill in 2021.

In addition to general education coursework, institutions are incorporating DEI into individual courses more informally. At one campus, faculty incorporate discussions about race into courses including History, American Studies, Dance, Music and Theatre. Another institution is exploring the feasibility of incorporating assignments related to Black Lives Matter (BLM) into its coursework.

State example

A state governing board recently provided guidelines for general education at its university systems, which were previously set at the university level. The individual institutions maintain flexibility in designating individual courses but now follow this state-level framework, which includes objectives around civics and democracy and requires content such as United States social history, international diversity, and cultures. This new framework shifts the role of institutions to emphasize the preparation of engaged citizens and readiness for improved level of discourse. Individual institutions may interpret the new components as DEI, although it is not stated in those terms by the governing board. Each university appointed a faculty-led committee to develop and adapt courses and curricula to fit within the new framework, for approval by the board. This shift constituted a major overhaul that took two years for the first university to test and implement.

Ongoing efforts

Two institutions shared that they are currently working to expand DEI offerings.

• One institution has held discussions with students and faculty for the past five years. Currently the Director of the Core Board and the University and Inclusion Officer are determining how to expand DEI offerings in each program beyond the single required designated course.
• At another institution, a Faculty Senate task force is currently exploring the feasibility of adding a DEI requirement into the general education curriculum. This institution is currently searching for a newly created Vice President for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion position.

Extracurricular DEI initiatives

In addition to diversity requirements in coursework as cited above, institutions have ongoing initiatives related to DEI. One institution recently launched a Race, Bias, and Equity Initiative. As a part of that initiative, students are engaging in a cross-campus common readings focused on issues of race.

Challenges

Several challenges prevent institutions from moving forward with these approaches:

• One challenge to creating new requirements is ensuring sufficient seats and teaching support to accommodate every student.
• There are also barriers to changing requirements at the institution level within a system, as institutions must ensure transferability across campuses.
• Members also want to ensure that DEI content is not simply added symbolically but delivers substantive knowledge and skill to students. Some have encountered resistance to making DEI content-specific and find it is added too broadly.
• Members also pointed out that faculty will need inclusive pedagogy training in many cases to develop the skills to lead difficult conversations, as many faculty are experts in their disciplines but not necessarily in cultural curriculum: “We can't change the curriculum without changing the faculty.”

One potential solution offered is to have faculty lead this work rather than a diversity committee dictating changes to faculty; rather, faculty can take the lead in suggesting what DEI content would look like in their discipline, for example, how DEI is relevant to engineering or architecture. It is also important to present this change not as adding on to existing faculty responsibilities, but as highlighting DEI concepts in existing materials.

Western Land Grant Cluster Members

• Colorado State University
• Langston University
• Montana State University
• New Mexico State University
• North Dakota State University
• Oklahoma State University
• South Dakota State University
• University of Arizona
• University of Idaho
• University of Nevada-Reno
• Utah State University
• University of Wyoming

North Carolina has robust systems of higher education, including 16 four-year public universities and 58 community colleges, supporting over 10,000 students as they pursue a bachelor’s degree through transfer each year (UNC System Interactive Data Dashboard). The Association of Public and Land Grant Universities (APLU) partnered with five institutions in the University of North Carolina System - North Carolina A&T State University, North Carolina State University,  University of North Carolina Charlotte, University of North Carolina Greensboro, University of North Carolina Wilmington - and an evaluation team to examine credit applicability and student outcomes.

The purpose of this multi-institution study was to better understand the relationship between credit alignment based on Baccalaureate Degree Plans, and success outcomes for transfer students, particularly those who earned an Associate in Arts (AA) or Associate in Science (AS) degree before transferring to the 4-year institution.

The structure of this report offers an introduction to transfer articulation within the context of North Carolina, describes the project and key points of the study, offers details about the findings and their implications on practice and policy, then provides a set of recommendations.

The data used in this report was developed by a task force of professionals representing the five university participants, including:

• Dr. Samantha Raynor, (Chair) Assistant Vice Provost for Strategic Student Success Initiatives at UNC-Greensboro
• Dr. Jess Boersma, Associate Dean for Student Success & Applied Learning at UNC-Wilmington
• Dr. Charles Clift, Assistant Vice Provost and University Registrar, NC State University
• Amanda Fleming, University Registrar, UNC-Wilmington
• Dr. John Smail, Dean of University College, UNC-Charlotte
• Dr. Regina Williams Davis, Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, NC A&T State University
• Dr. Carrie Zelna, Associate Vice Chancellor, NC State University

The report is attached to this blog, but can also be found here.

As the field of higher education continues responding to the catalytic events of 2020, higher education organizations like APLU have gained momentum as critical change agents in the work of institutional transformation at scale.

National collaborations, such as APLU’s Intermediary for Scale (IFS) initiative funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), have yielded critical lessons learned about how organizations can directly contribute to accelerating equitable outcomes for postsecondary student success.  

For many colleges, universities, and state systems, the challenge is not what to do but how to do it.  As an Intermediary, APLU is well-positioned to liaise with critical funders, partners in the field, and content experts to streamline support and disseminate promising practices to membership networks that are contributing to better outcomes for our nation’s most vulnerable student populations.

Intermediary Role

APLU has served in an Intermediary role since 2017. In 2020, APLU partnered with a select group of 16 universities from across the Powered by Publics network of clusters to implement evidence-based practices designed to increase equitable student success outcomes and degree completion.  Organizing discourse and creating conditions for learning, APLU leveraged a facilitated approach to conduct rigorous institutional needs assessments, collect disaggregated student data, cultivate a peer learning agenda, and broker technical assistance in advising, digital learning, data literacy, strategic finance, equity, and integrating the student voice.  

Lessons Learned

Each intermediary has a unique role to play to meet the needs of its distinct network. However, the following observations are necessary considerations to optimize a structure of support that leads to sustainable change, both for APLU IFS and more universally to any institutional engagement strategy:

• Transformation begins with equity.
• • Operationalizing equity as an explicit priority focused on the voice of faculty, staff, and students is critical to defining the institutional experience.
• Transformation takes time.
• • Understanding the unique DNA of network institutions, and the students they serve, to structure a comprehensive and integrated engagement model is critical to meeting them where they are, aligning with their priorities, and building a meaningful institutional experience.
• Transformation is an adaptive challenge.
• • Providing clear and articulated expectations for engaging cross-functional campus stakeholders is critical to a cohesive institutional experience.  
• Transformation requires capacity.
• • Building institutional capacity for data literacy and strategic finance is critical to a sustainable institutional experience.
• Transformation isn’t a destination, it’s a journey.
• • Establishing trusted relationships across campus that catalyze interpersonal connections is critical to the success of the institutional experience.

Participating Institutions

1. University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff
2. Clemson University
3. Illinois State University
4. Middle Tennessee State University
5. Montana State University
6. New Mexico State University
7. University of New Orleans
8. New Jersey Institute of Technology
9. Ohio University
10. Rutgers University-Newark
11. University of South Alabama
12. Texas Tech University
13. Tuskegee University
14. Virginia Commonwealth University
15. Western Michigan University
16. University of Wyoming

Here, we'll collect posts about the different ways you can use the PxP Learning Exchange to share your experience and knowledge and learn from your colleagues.

• PxP Learning Exchange Community Guidelines
• Explore and Engage on the Learning Exchange
• Learning Exchange Preview Video (from PxP Annual Meeting)

This brief highlights the lessons learned from an Equity Meets Design (eXd) workshop , including implications for institutions tackling equity challenges on their campuses, and recommendations for further support. Ten APLU member institutions – from both Powered by Publics (PxP) Cluster 6 (Urban Cluster) and Intermediaries for Scale – participated in the workshop, facilitated by an equity design coaching firm created by Dr. Christine Marie Ortiz Guzman.

Five institutions in the University of North Carolina (UNC) System (see below) and a research team at the Belk Center for Community College Leadership and Research (Belk Center) at the NC State University College of Education examined the relationship between transfer credit applicability and student outcomes. In 2014, the North Carolina Community College System (NCCCS) and the UNC system overhauled their Comprehensive Articulation Agreement (CAA) to include Baccalaureate Degree Plans (BDPs) that provide guidance both at the institution- and major-level. The Belk Center found that the CAA increased degree completion and decreased excess credit accumulation among community college transfer students, but recommended further evaluation to better understand the impact of BDPs.

This study used descriptive analyses to determine whether community college transfer students who enrolled at the five participating institutions in the fall of 2017 graduated within four years, completed the BDP before enrolling at the four-year institution, and/or changed majors after enrolling at the four-year institution. The study also employed logistic regression techniques to examine the relationship between BDP credit applicability and graduation, and whether this varies by race and socioeconomic factors.

Findings

Major findings are highlighted below (for additional detail please see the report):

• Although the majority (nearly 70%) of students in this sample graduated within four years of transferring to the university, the graduation rates were lower for students of color and Pell-eligible students.
• Students completed the majority (72%) of BDP courses before transferring, on average, but did not complete over one-quarter of the courses that were recommended before enrolling in the university.
• Completing a greater percentage of the BDP before transferring to the four-year institution did not increase the likelihood of BA graduation both overall and among students of color.

One potential factor to consider is whether students were aware of the BDP while enrolled at the community college. This study did not include surveys or interviews with students; further qualitative research would allow for the analysis of students’ perceptions and experiences, including awareness levels. The research team noted that the BDPs vary across institutions in their content, format, and online location – all factors that could affect accessibility and awareness levels for both students and advisors.

Recommendations

The research team recommended the following future practice and research to improve the effectiveness of BDPs:

• Standardize the BDP template across institutions and provide it in a centralized, searchable database.
• Replicate the BDP credit alignment analysis at the institutional level to determine specific courses that present barriers to transfer students.

Better understanding the relationship between course transferability and successful outcomes is critical, particularly for the low-income and Black, LatinX, and Indigenous students who are more likely to begin postsecondary education at the community college.

Participating institutions

• North Carolina A&T State University
• North Carolina State University
• University of North Carolina at Charlotte
• University of North Carolina at Greensboro
• University of North Carolina Wilmington

A colleague recently shared an insightful article by Patrick Methvin, Director of Postsecondary Success at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, discussing key lessons learned regarding institutional transformation in higher education. These lessons emphasize the importance of a unifying framework for change, centering on race and income, aligned multi-level leadership, and a learning mindset. These themes align with our internal discussions about the crucial elements necessary for transformative change in higher education.

In our work with the Intermediaries for Scale (IFS) initiative and in Powered by Publics, we aim to help institutions create cross-functional collaborations that change culture, structures, and shared ownership of equitable student success. The article resonates with our focus, as it emphasizes realigning institutional structures, culture, and business models to create a student-centered, inclusive learning environment.

Methvin's working definition of institutional transformation highlights the significance of leveraging strategic data use, catalytic leadership, and continuous improvement to achieve dramatic, equitable outcomes and educational value. These insights reinforce the notion that the challenges we face in higher education transformation are shared across the field, providing valuable guidance on effectively addressing these challenges.

We encourage all higher education professionals, policymakers, and institutional leaders to explore this article and consider how to apply these strategies to their institutions or initiatives. By learning from one another, we can collectively drive transformative change in higher education and achieve more equitable student outcomes.

Direct link to the article: https://usprogram.gatesfoundat...s/10-lessons-learned

University of Wyoming's Catalyst for Change

As part of an ongoing series, join us as we delve into the University of Wyoming’s transformation process, the challenges faced, strategies employed, and future plans for continued innovation in student success. Dr. Nycole Courtney’s leadership and vision have catalyzed the University of Wyoming's approach to student success and institutional change through the Intermediaries for Scale (IFS) initiative. APLU interviewed @Nycole Courtney to learn more about the University of Wyoming’s journey and what she’s learned along the way.

What is Nycole’s role at the University of Wyoming, and how has she been involved in the institutional transformation process?

She currently serves as the Dean of Student Success and Graduation and Associate Vice President for Student Affairs at the University of Wyoming, her alma mater. Throughout her time at the university, Nycole has been a driving force behind the institution's transformation process. She has played a crucial role in redefining the university's approach to student success and fostering a culture of continuous improvement.

"My position was created to focus on retention efforts and create strategies for closing equity gaps. I work collaboratively with faculty and staff to develop and implement programs that support our students." From the beginning, Nycole emphasized a comprehensive approach to student success. The university’s leadership, including the Provost, has emphasized that “student success is everyone’s job. So, we’re going to name it as a priority.”

To get started, the University assembled a 'transformation team' to assess various aspects of the university's readiness, including Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI); four-year degree pathways; advising; and other priority areas. Recognizing the importance of culture shifting and change management, the university established the multidisciplinary Student Success Institutional Transformation Task Force (SSIT), which has had a significant impact on institutional culture by addressing barriers faced by students of all backgrounds and working to improve academic experiences, climate, policies, and procedures, plus college navigation. This commitment has profoundly influenced the culture and approach at the University of Wyoming, ensuring that students feel supported, valued, and heard.

What was the main challenge the University of Wyoming faced in student success, and how did Nycole and her team decide to tackle it?

The main challenge the University of Wyoming faced in student success was improving retention rates, particularly from freshman to sophomore year. Nycole acknowledged that they were ‘average’ in this area but had room to grow. To her, “Retention itself is an outcome. It's not the actual process. So, the challenge for us was building the process to get to higher retention."

To address this challenge, Nycole and her team built a strategic plan for student success, focusing on reducing student success barriers both through institutional causes and national known barriers. They started with the eight Barriers to Student Success identified by the EAB and other areas requiring the most focus.  Collaboration was crucial in addressing these barriers. Nycole emphasized the importance of working closely with faculty and staff across campus to create a unified approach to student success, breaking down silos. By establishing the Student Success Institutional Transformation Task Force, the team was able to grasp culture change and start rowing in the same direction towards higher retention as the outcome. The team also considered the role of DEI in building better retention. They started to unpack the reasons behind their work and how DEI could contribute to their ultimate goal of achieving higher retention by reducing student success barriers.

How did the team gather the necessary data to make informed decisions about student success?

Initially, the UW team brought in their Office of Institutional Analysis to participate in the Postsecondary Data Partnership (PDP) project, a National Student Clearinghouse-led initiative that simplifies data collection and reporting for higher education institutions. Participation provides access to key student success metrics, helping institutions identify areas for improvement and evaluate program effectiveness. However, as their involvement was not sustainable long-term, they focused on gathering the necessary data internally to create their own student success dashboards. Nycole explained, "Now we have these live dashboards, and we’re going in and looking [at the data] on the regular as opposed to having to reinvent the wheel every time, and it just stays updated out of our student information system."

They analyzed various priorities and barriers that students faced and crafted a strategic plan for student success, emphasizing actions, assessments, and outcomes to enhance retention rates. By examining the barriers to success, the team could develop their plan. Nycole further emphasized the value of data-driven decision-making, adding, "Having access to accurate, real-time data has been instrumental in helping us identify areas where we can improve and measure the impact of our programs. We're now able to make informed decisions and adapt our strategies based on what the data is telling us."

The dashboard has proven to be a tremendous success, enabling the team to present an annual retention report to the Board of Trustees, focusing on different student populations, and holding them accountable for their work. Nycole elaborated, "We were able to take this dashboard, really focus in on the last three years and talk about retention." She also noted, "Now we're accountable to that work, which is great." By utilizing this data-driven approach and implementing a strategic plan for student success, the University of Wyoming team can analyze retention and probation rates, address various barriers and priorities in student retention, and work towards achieving higher retention rates.

Are there any specific initiatives or programs that the University has implemented that Nycole and her team are particularly proud of and why?

Nycole is particularly proud of the Saddle Up onboarding program implemented at the University of Wyoming. This initiative, inspired by the success of institutions like the University of Nevada-Reno, aims to ensure a smooth transition for incoming first-time, full-time students and improve overall retention rates. Highlighting its impact, “We put 1500 students through this program…We went from 90% retention for fall to spring, full-time, first-time students to 93% this year.” Additionally, they hope the program will lead to “a significant reduction in the equity gap between underrepresented students and their peers.” Since the program only started in Fall 2022, more data will be evaluated over time. The team is continuously building on this initiative, focusing on students on probation and capturing these students before they go on suspension. Their work with students on probation received a boost through the Data Literacy Institute project offered by APLU and the Association of Institutional Research (AIR) in Spring 2023. Nycole explained, "The AIR project is focusing solely on probation, and we're building out a proposal for funding from potential donors that says, 'Every student on probation can opt into either a course or self-guided recovery.’” These students would receive support from a ‘Cowboy Coach’ peer mentor and an academic coach providing more intrusive advising to help them stay on track. She expressed enthusiasm for the project's outcomes and is excited to see continued progress in student success.

How has the University's involvement in the Intermediaries for Scale initiative impacted the University of Wyoming's culture and approach to student success?

Nycole expressed, “The University of Wyoming is very humble and very appreciative of this opportunity.” The IFS initiative has enabled the university to manage a larger scope of work within a shorter period and facilitated the collection and analysis of data more effectively, helping to build the Student Success dashboard. IFS provided access to valuable resources, insights, and connections, fostering a culture of continuous improvement and accountability. Further, “There's now a greater sense of urgency and shared responsibility when it comes to student success,” she said.

Each IFS cohort institution completed an Institutional Transformation Assessment (ITA), which is a web-based tool that helps universities understand institutional strengths and areas for improvement with the goal of building capacity to better support students on campus and develop an action plan for reaching the institution’s student success goals. The ITA was the catalyst for change on campus, showing the university's readiness and the need for culture change. Participation in the IFS cohort led directly to the creation of the multidisciplinary Strategic Student Success Institutional Transformation Task Force, allowing the university to build bridges and partnerships, blending Academic and Student Affairs in a way that was desperately needed. Indirectly, it has created a more supportive and inclusive environment for all students. She emphasized the importance of conveying to students that “you belong, you matter, speak up, lean in, whatever that is, and we will support you.”

Additionally, Nycole saw the APLU community as an invaluable resource. She highlighted the rewarding journey of working with APLU and its impact on the university, saying, “It has allowed us to address critical issues and stay relevant in the higher education landscape.” Their Provost and Vice President for Student Affairs see a lot of value in the IFS initiative, and student success is now named in the larger strategic plan. Through the IFS initiative, the University of Wyoming has been able to foster a culture of student success that will continue to grow and thrive.

What are the future plans for continued innovation in student success at the University of Wyoming?

Nycole envisions ongoing growth and development in the area of student success at the University of Wyoming, stating, “We're always looking for new ways to innovate and support our students. Some of our future plans include expanding our Saddle Up program to reach even more students, implementing targeted interventions for specific student populations, and leveraging technology to improve the overall student experience.” The University will embed student success into its strategic plan and seek philanthropic support for initiatives such as completion grants.

Emphasizing collaboration, shared vision, community, and belonging, Nycole indicated, “One of the most important aspects of our work is fostering a culture of collaboration and continuous improvement across campus. As we move forward, we'll continue to work closely with faculty, staff, and students to identify opportunities for growth and ensure that we're all working together to support the success of every student at the University of Wyoming.” She highlighted the importance of community and belonging: “It provided a lens that students really need community. And they really need to build that sense of belonging just as much as our institution needed it for itself.”

The IFS provided “a pivotal opportunity to scale and sustain a culture of student success. It now has been embedded and weaved into our work enough that I don’t think it’s going anywhere.” She also stressed, "There's no one-size-fits-all solution for student success. It's essential to be agile, adaptive, and open to new ideas." With Dr. Nycole Courtney’s leadership, the University is poised for even greater achievements in the future!

As we conclude this first blog on the University of Wyoming's transformative journey, we celebrate their commitment to fostering a culture of student success. Stay tuned for the second installment of our series next month, where we will continue to highlight the remarkable progress made by institutions participating in the Intermediaries for Scale initiative, shedding light on their innovative strategies, collaborative efforts, and the impact they have on higher education. Join us as we explore the inspiring stories that are shaping the future of student success.

Powered by Public’s (PxP) Cluster 13, the Data Integration Cluster, developed a Data Maturity Index (DMI) to assess institutions’ data culture and readiness for strategic data use by identifying both strengths and areas in need of improvement.

Data Maturity Definition

The DMI is an assessment tool for users to evaluate their institution’s data capacity and support a learning community for improving the use of data across campus. The DMI defines Data Maturity as:

“The ability of an institution to improve the organizational, procedural, and technical levels of its data ecosystem to leverage institutional data to produce insights that inform strategic initiatives that meet institutional goals and support student success.”[1]

The DMI assesses stakeholder perceptions of institutional data capacity on 31 items across a number of dimensions, including data governance, collection, quality, dissemination, analysis, culture, and evaluation.

DMI Implementation

Cluster 13 members distributed the DMI to stakeholders at their institutions, and Cluster 14 teams that participated in the Data Literacy Institute (DLI) also took the assessment. The five institutions participating in Cohort 1 of the DLI completed the DMI both before and after participation, and 5 institutions in Cohort 2 took the DMI before participating. Taken together, a total of 200 individuals have completed the DMI.

DMI Findings

Strengths. Across all respondents from 15 institutions, the highest rated item was about the extent to which the institution has identified key stakeholders who will transform the data culture. This item, within the Data Governance topic, received an average of 4.1 out of 5.

Areas of Need. Specific areas of need that emerged based on relatively low average scores include:

1. A central repository for data storage;
2. Staff data training; and
3. Access to reports from a central platform for individual departments.

The two questions about overall data maturity were among the lowest scores, pointing to a need for initiatives such as DLI to improve data usage across institutions. These scores could be indicative of all the different aspects of data maturity – governance, collection, analysis, etc. – being considered together, and reflective of overall data culture.

Pre/Post-DLI 1 Findings

With the first Cohort of DLI institutions, the DMI had the opportunity to track progress on data maturity indicators before and after participation, reflecting increased knowledge and awareness from the program. Of the 91 Cohort 1 participants who responded to the DMI before participating, 37 responded to the post-survey. Across the 29 topic-specific items on the DMI questionnaire (excluding overall questions), participants indicated an average of a one-point increase on a scale of one to five, from 2.7 to 3.9.

Future DMI Use

Cohort 1 institutions are planning to build their own data literacy programs, which may include the use of DMI. The DMI results will inform action plans to build on strengths identified and address the primary areas of need.

The DMI is available to all institutions in the PxP network and APLU will offer support for any institution wanting to implement the DMI on their campus. Please reach out to CDM@aplu.org or dnadasen@aplu.org to learn more.

Cluster 13 Institutions

• George Mason University
• Ohio University
• Tennessee State University
• Texas Tech University
• University of New Hampshire

Cluster 14 – DLI Cohort 1

• Kent State University
• Montclair University
• Oakland University
• University of Minnesota-Duluth
• Wright State University

Cluster 14 – DLI Cohort 2

• Bowling Green State University
• Illinois State University
• Miami University - Ohio
• Tennessee State University
• University of Maine

[1] Powered by Publics. The Data Maturity Index. November 2021. Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU). https://www.aplu.org/news-and-...-integration-cluster

In an ideal world, every full-time student can navigate the curriculum in 4 years and find course content accessible, meaningful, and relevant to their educational goals. In practice, however, there are delays, false starts, and roadblocks along the student’s pathway to a degree. These bottlenecks are not always clearly visible to the faculty responsible for the curriculum. To address this challenge, many universities have begun using Curricular Analytics, a free tool that allows universities to visualize a student’s progress through a degree program, simulate alternatives, and optimize the pathway to success. Curricular Analytics can also be cross-referenced with student performance and demographic data to identify whether barriers disproportionately affect students from minoritized and low-income backgrounds. In this webinar, leaders from several Powered by Publics clusters will share how they use Curricular Analytics to assess equity gaps, engage faculty around the results, and catalyze changes to the curriculum. Attendees learned about the tool and its application in program review, as well as strategies for improving student success and obtaining buy-in from faculty.

Please find the link below for a recording of the event!

Optimizing Degree Programs for Equity and Timely Completion

Several clusters of Powered by Publics institutions have used improvement science to understand the root causes of educational inequities, identify a specific improvement aim, and test ideas for change. The Improvement Science Toolkit, developed in partnership with WestEd, consists of a series of scaffolded resources that can be used in sequential order to guide institutions through an improvement journey.

What is Improvement Science?

The simplest way to define improvement science is as a highly practical form of rigorous inquiry. Desire for the use of improvement science begins with a dissatisfaction with the status quo and a recognition that existent outcomes are either not desirable or just not good enough. Improvement science addresses the ways that work systems are designed with the recognition that these systems directly shape how individuals carry out their responsibilities. It focuses on the specific tasks people do, the processes and tools they use and how prevailing policies, organizational structures, and norms affect this. Applying improvement science would direct greater attention to how better to design and fit together the many elements that shape the way organizations work.

Improvement science entails getting down into the micro details as to how any proposed set of changes is actually supposed to improve outcomes. At the heart is an approach of rapid tests of change to guide the development, revision and continued fine-tuning of new tools, processes, work roles, and relationships. The approach is explicitly designed to accelerate learning by doing. As iterative cycles of change proceed, previously invisible problems often emerge, and improvement activities may need to tack off in some new directions. The objective here is quite different from the traditional pilot program that seeks to offer a proof of concept. Improvement research, in contrast, is a focused learning journey. The overall goal is to develop the necessary know-how for a change idea ultimately to spread faster and more effectively.

Participants are constantly asking three core improvement questions:

• What is the specific problem I am now trying to solve?
• What change might I introduce and why?
• How will I know whether the change is actually an improvement?

How to Use this Toolkit

We recommend using these resources in sequential order to support your institution's improvement journey from start to finish. However, if you are already using improvement science, some individual resources may be helpful based on where you are in the process.

1. Introduction to Improvement Science

• Overview (Document or Presentation)

2. Team Formation

• Criteria for Improvement Teams
• Team Charter

3. System Analysis

• Data for Equity Protocol
• Identifying Learning Goals
• Methods for conducting system analysis:
  • Empathy Interview Tool
  • 5 Whys Template
  • Fishbone Diagram Template
  • Process Mapping Instructions

4. Develop Aim Statement

• Crafting an Improvement Aim

5. Develop and Test Change Ideas

• Change Idea Generation and Prioritization
• Plan, Do, Study Act (PDSA) Template

6. Learning Reflection and Planning

• Improvement Journey Reflection Tool

Special thanks to Christine Han at WestEd for authoring or customizing these resources for APLU members, and to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for their support.

On Saturday, November 5^th, 2022, Powered by Publics hosted their annual convening, “Future Forward”, in Denver, Colorado. During this all-day event, members of the Powered by Publics clusters met to share   what they have learned through their collaboration and efforts to improve their universities. The agenda for the day centered around three main topics: advising, student belonging, and data integration.

Student Success through Advising,

Advising is critical to student success. Many participants characterized successful advising programs as relational rather than transactional and impersonal. Although this is something many wanted, they also expressed concern about overworked advising staff with high caseloads. Those who made the greatest progress looked at data from champion advisors and analyzed them to build a case for effective practices that should be scaled.  Finally, learning loss caused by the pandemic is a top concern for advisors and those who manage them.

Student Belonging

Student belonging is an essential prerequisite for retention. In exploring the root causes of student belonging, attendees identified feelings of isolation that were exacerbated for minoritized students. Financial stress was another determinant of student attrition. Students’ concerns about finances stemmed from multiple causes, including lack of transparency around financial aid packages and lack of knowledge of available resources beyond financial aid.

Proposed solutions included providing better access to financial resources, simplifying communications around financial aid, and creating opportunities for students to feel incorporated into the campus culture. Participants reported that their students felt unseen and unrepresented on campus, particularly in the classroom.  Diversifying the faculty continues to be a top priority to ensure students can find faculty with similar backgrounds and experiences. In addition, when faculty and staff are empowered with data and knowledge about student perspectives, they are better placed to help students feel integrated into campus life.

Connecting Data with Strategies for Change.

The importance of data integration was a recurring theme throughout the day. Most attendees accessed their data through an institutional dashboard, and data are framed for campus leaders (e.g.  presidents and provosts). Attendees discussed how to broaden access and improve data presentation. Some attendees questioned which data were most helpful and thought that better training would improve data access and use.

Attendees also prioritized classroom success and curriculum redesign as important topics for future inquiry. Some themes from those conversations included identifying what good teaching looks like, providing faculty with professional development to strengthen inclusive and culturally responsive teaching skills, and identifying a "coalition of the willing" of motivated faculty to lead change efforts with their peers."

This year's conference brought together many individuals who were enthusiastic about student success. Participants had numerous opportunities to make connections with their peers across clusters.   As Powered by Publics enters a new phase of collaboration around topic-based communities of practice, APLU intends to hold more convenings like this one to engage members around critical student success issues.

Original text appears at https://www.aplu.org/projects-.../powered-by-publics/

Strategic Priorities:

Taking explicit action to pursue educational equity for low-income, first-generation, and students of color (Hispanic/Latinx, Black or African American, American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, Asian, and two or more races), and other populations for which the university aims to improve equity.

Committing to transparency by sharing data and monitoring progress toward equity goals.

Developing common opportunities for cross-cluster learning, sharing, and collective action in the thematic areas of Affordability, Teaching & Learning, and Holistic Student Supports.

APLU and its partners committing to invest in institutional capacity through grants and technical assistance.

Transferring between institutions has become more common, yet the successful completion of a four-year degree has not improved for transfer students – particularly for those from underserved populations. For this reason, the Southeastern Cluster (Cluster 5) of PxP collaborated on a report, “A Focus on Transfer Student Success Programs and Best Practices” to examine transfer-specific state policies, institutional partnerships and practices, and key metrics for assessment, all with a focus on equitable outcomes. In addition, the cluster leads who authored the report collected and analyzed institutional data comparing the graduation rates of transfer students to students who began at the institution.

Promising Transfer Practices

Examples of particularly effective policies and practices summarized in the report follow (for additional examples see the report):

State policies

• Florida has had a comprehensive statewide articulation policy in place since 1971. Successful components of this policy cited in the report include guaranteeing transfer of credit via the Statewide Course Numbering System, guaranteeing transfer of the general education block of credit, establishing a list of statewide common prerequisite courses, establishing a process for determining statewide credit-by-examination equivalencies, and a common college transcript. The state further cements these guarantees through documented Transfer Student Rights.
• North Carolina also has a Comprehensive Articulation Agreement guaranteeing credit transfer for specific academic programs. The University of North Carolina System has a robust public data dashboard that includes transfer benchmarks.
• The State Council of Higher Education for Virginia (SCHEV) launched TransferVA in 2019, which includes “a 16-credit hour Passport and a 30-credit Uniform Certificate of General Studies to fulfill lower-division general education requirements at any public institution," two-to-four-year course alignment, transfer program maps, specialized transfer agreements, and an online transfer portal.

Institutional practices

• Clemson University offers the Transfer 2 Tiger Mentor Program (T2T), among other transfer supports. This peer mentoring program connects new transfer students with upperclassmen transfer students “to help cultivate a support system within the transfer community...”
• Florida State University evaluated the impact of a mandatory academic success course for transfer students and found that this required course had significant positive effects on transfer student success. The course not only helped transfer students develop academic skills but also fostered a sense of belonging and community among transfer students.
• East Carolina University offers Pirate Promise, where students who complete an associate degree at a partnering community college are guaranteed admission, have their application fee waived, and have access to specialized support services, including a transfer coach who maintains regular contact with students in the program.

Findings

Authors of the report made the following observations based on the quantitative analysis and qualitative evidence from the literature and a scan of state policies and transfer practices at each institution:

• The data collected show that the four-year graduation rate is lower for transfer students than for first-time, full-time freshmen across the institutions, however caution should be exercised in interpreting these data due to lack of common definitions, including the number of incoming credits of transfer students.
• Transfer student experiences vary by characteristics of the institution. For example, transfer students make up 43% of the student population at the University of North Carolina Wilmington (a larger share compared to other institutions) and the institution offers transfer-specific orientations and targeted first-year seminar sections. Perhaps as a result, the graduation rate gap for transfer and first-time students is smaller than at other institutions.
• Anecdotally, it seems that both breadth and depth of transfer practices matter: “Institutions with robust, embedded supports for transfer students had higher rates of retention and graduation than institutions with fewer or less extensive embedded support programs.”
• State systems to which these institutions belong “vary in the degree to which they have championed, resourced, and held accountable the respective universities” to transfer student success.
• Transfer support does not become successful overnight: “Some of the most successful programs catalogued in this paper are the result of many years and even decades of development, implementation, assessment, and continuous improvement.”

Limitations

It should be noted that data for the transfer student population did not have any parameters around number of incoming credits, and the institutions faced challenges developing a common, statewide transfer student success data set due to variance between institutions in definitions and assessment metrics.

Recommendations

The institutions in this cluster recommended further study including looking beyond retention and graduation to socioeconomic indicators of success such as the mobility and productivity of their graduates. In additional, several of the institutions in this cluster have begun using Curricular Analytics to identify potential barriers for transfer students, and three institutions in the cluster are collaborating on a transfer model specific to STEM pipelines.

The report can be found at https://acrobat.adobe.com/link...73-9ead-b9843dfd4b07.

List of institutions in the Southeastern Cluster

• Clemson University
• East Carolina University
• Florida State University
• North Carolina A&T State University
• North Carolina State University at Raleigh
• South Carolina State University
• University of North Carolina at Charlotte
• University of North Carolina at Greensboro
• University of North Carolina Wilmington
• University of North Carolina System
• Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
• Virginia State University

On August 11, 2022, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) released a notice inviting applications for the fiscal year (FY) 2022 “Postsecondary Success Program.” There is approximately $5 million in funding available, and ED expects to make between 5-8 two-year awards of between $600,000 to $1 million.  Applications are due October 11, 2022.

In the initial pilot, eligible institutions include those that are currently eligible for Ed funding through its Title III and V programs—this includes Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs), Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs), and colleges eligible for the Strengthening Institutions Program (SIP). (For current eligibility, see the 2022 Title III and V program eligibility matrix here.) All institutions of higher education are eligible to apply as a consortium, however, so long as the lead applicant is eligible to participate in Title III or V programs.

The federal register notice includes a significant amount of explanatory detail if your institution is interested in applying, including requirements about levels of evidence; requirement to submit a logic model (ED suggests this as a resource); and application instructions. The application itself is available at grants.gov; you will need to register a login to access the digital application.

Please feel free to share this opportunity with colleagues who might be interested.

How are faculty on your campus continuing to adapt to demands for online and blended courses?

APLU has heard from many of our member institutions that across the country, faculty and instructional staff, among many other administrators and staff, are exhausted. Even as face to face courses and other on-campus activities resume, faculty must continue to redesign their courses and think of how to engage their students beyond the classroom.

Our colleagues within the Personalized Learning Consortium at APLU are partnering with the Online Learning Consortium, Achieving the Dream, and the Every Learner Everywhere network to provide a free, virtual professional development opportunity for your faculty and instructional staff in disciplines of writing, math, biology, and chemistry to identify, share, and develop discipline-specific teaching and learning strategies, with a focus on effective and equitable digital learning and teaching with technology.  

The Spring 2022 Disciplinary Communities of Practice will consist of three 2-hour synchronous sessions for each discipline, and the sessions will center on the theme of Developing Critical Engagement in and across our Disciplines. In addition to the synchronous sessions, the Communities of Practice host a structured asynchronous platform where participants can continue discussions, share resources, and advance the field’s understanding of how to best implement digital learning in their respective disciplines.

If this is of interest to your campus community, we ask you to please share out the registration link or use the attached PDF to invite your faculty and instructional staff in the disciplines of writing, math, biology, and chemistry who are invested in enhancing their teaching.

More information and registration are available at this link: https://bit.ly/Spring22CoP