Removing Hurdles Towards Progress to Degree: Curricular, Policy, … · 2015. 9. 16. · Kimi Ikeda...

Kimi Ikeda – Associate Vice Provost

Cem Sunata – Registrar California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo

Monday, April 2, 2012 5:00-6:00 pm

Session ID 304

Removing Hurdles Towards Progress to Degree: Curricular,

Policy, and Technical Challenges

AACRAO Philadelphia 2012 Session ID: 304

In this session… We’ll attempt to identify the majority of institutional issues that

students face that might prevent them from making progress to degree.

Describe how Cal Poly identified these issues and started an institutional collaboration to solve them.

Identify key players in the institution whose buy-in and contribution is crucial for these efforts to be successful.

Assumption: Perfect degree audit.


Cal Poly • In beautiful San Luis Obispo, CA

• Part of the 23-campus CSU system

• 18,762 students*

• 1,210 faculty* • Comprehensive undergraduate education, combining technical and professional curricula with the arts and humanities • 68 bachelor’s, 29 master’s programs • All undergraduate programs are “fully impacted” *Fall 2011

Student Success – Guiding Principles


Student Success – Guiding Principles Students’ path to graduation should be transparent, flexible and

as simple as possible Students should be treated equitably through the consistent

application of policy – including a clearly defined appeal process Students should have university-wide support in reaching

success (i.e., graduation) regardless of their affiliation (e.g., major)

Students deserve communication in a timely manner thereby

allowing them to make any necessary adjustments to their academic plans


Student Success – Guiding Principles Upon admission to Cal Poly, students should have a clear

understanding of the expectations being placed upon them (e.g., common standard of progress, impact of co-curricular activities on their progress to degree, etc.)

Policies and procedures should support the students’ learning experience

Continuous review of our policies and practices should be performed regularly – input from our students and other stakeholders should be sought as well as the use of metrics

Policies and practices should promote quality programs and efficient use of resources.

Curriculum


Requisites - Before

In 2009, only 25% of all class requisites, as defined in the academic catalog, were being enforced through PeopleSoft.

“Line dropping” – What Cal Poly calls when an instructor asks a student be dropped from their class during the first day/week of classes when they realize that they do not meet the prerequisites.

No “Post Enrollment Requisite Checking” in place.


Requisites - After We began a 19 month, multi-phased overhaul project.

September 2009 - May 2010: Faculty reviewed all requisites.

May 2010 – November 2010: Every requisite that did not “change” was coded into PeopleSoft, for Winter 2011 registration.

November 2010 – April 2011: Every requisite that was “revised” was coded into PeopleSoft, for Summer/Fall 2011 registration.

“Post Enrollment Requisite Checking” in place for Fall 2012.


Clear Curricular Path to Degree Course Substitutions

Office of the Registrar processes approximately 400 course substitutions a month!

The newly implemented course substitution electronic workflow

Faster processing Analytics backend to determine whether deeper curricular

changes needed.


Clear Curricular Path to Degree Transfer Articulation

Timely transfer articulation is crucial in order to prevent students from taking unnecessary classes during their first quarter.

Cal Poly’s incoming Fall class is mostly first-time freshmen, however 800 transfer students still need to progress to degree on a

timely manner More and more freshmen are bringing college transfer work

Competing demands during Summer – degree posting vs. transfer articulation


Clear Curricular Path to Degree Navigating the Curriculum Accurate and up-to-date 4 year degree flowcharts.

Are the courses really available during terms stated in the flowcharts?

Do they communicate important milestones to students?

Interdependency of flowcharts. Ex: Are all the flowcharts telling the students to take ENG 101

during their first Fall term?

Consistency of flowcharts.

Flowcharts - Before

4/3/2012

Flowcharts - After

4/3/2012


Block Scheduling – What is it?

Designed to start first-time freshmen (FTF) off on the “right track” for their first quarter at Cal Poly.

Students are scheduled into their Fall classes based on “tracks”,

which are a reflection of the flowchart for the major. All FTF receive a guaranteed full-time schedule composed of all

degree applicable courses, free of time conflicts.


Block Scheduling – Tracks

Algorithms that place each student into carefully chosen set of courses (12-16 units)

Takes AP credit and prior coursework into consideration Re-evaluated each year Allow for improved communication between colleges, giving

them a much better idea on how to gauge their course and seat offerings for FTF


Sample Freshman Track

AERO

Name: 1. TRACK A 2011 Has HS Chem

Notes: Student has HS chemistry

Condition: 'no_hs_chem' is false

Course Expressions

1. 'AERO 121'

2. if student has credit in 'MATH 142' then

if student has credit in 'PHYS 131' or student has credit in 'PHYS 141' then

take concurrently { 'MATH 143' 'PHYS 132' }

else


end if

elif student has credit in 'MATH 141' then

if student has credit in 'PHYS 131' or student has credit in 'PHYS 141' then


else


end if

else

take concurrently {

'MATH 141'

and first available { 'IME 144' 'PSY 201' 'PSY 202' 'D2' }

} end if

3. if student has credit in 'ENGL 134' then

take first available { 'A2' 'D3' 'C3' }

else

take first available { 'A1' 'D3' 'C3' }

end if


Block Scheduling - Benefits Guaranteed full time schedule (12-16 units). Highly satisfied

students and parents

Freshmen do not have to compete with current students for seats

Students have a healthy understanding of course “load” in their first quarter on a university campus

Decreasing rates of academic probation among first time freshmen since the introduction of block scheduling 3 years ago

Clear message of “graduate on time” and “class of 2015” is communicated.

Academic Policies


Three Key Academic Policies That Affect Progress to Degree

Expected Academic Progress Change of Major Academic Probation/Disqualification


Expected Academic Progress (EAP) Student Success

A tool to monitor student’s progress to degree Provides an “advising” opportunity.


Expected Academic Progress (EAP) Defined

Designed to help students graduate on time and to provide them with the support they need along the way.

Requires students to make a predetermined level of progress

towards their declared major each academic year. Academic progress is measured using their degree audit and

reflected in the EAP report. Report is distributed to colleges after the census date and before

the start of registration for the next term.


Expected Academic Progress (EAP)

Calculated by dividing the total number of degree applicable units completed and in-progress by the total number of units required for the major.

Freshmen 1st year – 20% 2nd year – 45% 3rd year – 75% 4th year – 100%

Transfer 1st year – 55% 2nd year – 80% 3rd year – 100%

Sample EAP Report

4/3/2012


EAP Gauge – The Student View The EAP gauge tells a student whether they are “ON

TRACK” or “OFF TRACK” in their degree progress.


EAP Gauge – The Student View

The gauge is located in the Poly Profile, in the Academic Progress section.


Change of Major Policy Student Success

Cal Poly requires students to declare their majors at their time of application

Over 30% of our students change majors (successfully)

Remove the “stigma” – encourage communication Provide an “advising” opportunity


Change of Major - Before

Processes/rules are set by each department and are inconsistent and in some cases are unclear

Some students could not change major within a reasonable time period

“Back door” admissions

Impacts time to degree

Changing majors is not always the “right” thing to do

“Synthetic” majors


Change of Major - After

All students seeking change of major are directed to follow this common path:

Review curricular requirements of the target major

Meet with current advisor to discuss options

Meet with target major advisor/chair to discuss the possibility of changing majors

If a change is appropriate, the student and the department enter into an ICMA (Individualized Change of Major Agreement)


Change of Major – The Contract An agreement that states which target major (or other) courses

and/or other requirements the student must successfully complete before being accepted to the target major

Students cannot enter into an ICMA during their first quarter

ICMA cannot exceed two quarters

Maximum of three specified courses or 12 units

Student must still make reasonable degree progress in their current major

One chance to be accepted


Probation/Disqualification Policy Student Success

Early Intervention Build “good habits” early Provides an “advising” opportunity


Probation/Disqualification Policy Defined

Subject to Disqualification

• SDQ1 – anytime the CP cum or HE cum GPA < 2.0 • SDQ2 – on AP for 2 consecutive quarters • SDQ3 – on AP for 4 non-consecutive quarters

Disqualification

• DSQ1 – on AP 3 consecutive quarters • DSQ2 – on AP 3 or more non-consecutive quarters

and CP cum or HE cum GPA < 2.0


Probation/Disqualification Policy Freshmen Success Program (FSP)

First introduced at the end of Fall 2009 Treatment group Control group

All first time freshmen who got on AP during their first quarter

were required to attend the FSP Program consists of Large group session Small group sessions with academic coaches

Focus on self-efficacy and identifying the unique obstacle(s) for each student.



Mean term GPA performance by college over 2010-11 academic year



Percent of enrollment by group and quarter

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

100

Fall Winter Spring Fall

2011 2010 Treatment 2010 Control

Academic Advising


Academic Advising - Before

Decentralized model.

Highly prescriptive.

Very faculty-heavy.

Self governed advising council with no direct reporting or support structure.

Advisor/student ratio is as little as 1/1000.

No coordination or cooperation on the advising functions throughout the campus.

Inconsistent messages to students.


Academic Advising - After

New position: Assistant Vice Provost for University Advising Unite campus advising functions Lead the collaborative advising structure Provide advocacy and awareness for advising Provide and lead professional development

Three-tiered Advising Council structure Academic Affairs and Student Affairs advising resources

united. Newly formed Student Advisory Board with diverse

representation.


Academic Advising - After Switch from prescriptive to developmental advising model

Understanding majors and the breadth of career options with transferrable skill

Curricular and co-curricular experiences that create cohesion and intentionality

Awareness of Expected Academic Progress benchmarks; intrusive advising for those who fall behind

Understanding double counting (GE and major requirements)

Regular training and professional development on changing policies and processes

Online modules/courses to assist students in growing their self-efficacy and in understanding behaviors that impede progress


Summary Transparency

Fairness

Accuracy

Accountability

Consistency

Effective communication

Strong collaboration


4/3/2012

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12

Fall Winter Spring

44% drop in overall AP rates in the last 3 years


Thank You! Kimi Ikeda – [email protected]

Cem Sunata – [email protected]

Please tell us how we did! Evaluation Form Session ID 304

Date post:	21-Aug-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times

Removing Hurdles Towards Progress to Degree: Curricular, Policy, … · 2015. 9. 16. · Kimi Ikeda...

Documents