Foe report11 by George Ramirez

FoE

Westfield State University Foundations of Excellence速 in the First College Year Self Study

Morning Assembly c. 1870

Table of Contents

Summary

Introduction to the Project

Foundations Dimension Committee Membership

Themes and Action Plans Emerging from the Self-Study

Foundations of Excellence Grade Report

Student and Faculty Surveys

Summary of the Dimension Reports

Philosophy

Transitions

All Students

Organization

Learning

Faculty

Roles and Purposes

Improvement

Diversity

Conclusion

Appendices

FoE Strategic Plan Foundations of Excellence Task Force Launch Invitees Faculty/Staff Survey Instrument Student Survey Instrument

Prepared by Maureen McCartney Associate Dean 2011

The unexamined life is not worth living. â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Socrates1

Summary Over the last two semesters, a core group of 36 faculty, staff and students engaged in a study of the strengths and challenges of how we, as a University, conduct the First Year. Four committees reviewed nine Dimensions and developed 110 recommendations for action. The recommendations were consolidated into three broad themes that call for us to build a framework for supporting and enhancing the First Year, communicate with each other on this important transition period, focus on academic connections, enhance dialogues on diversity, and increase our emphasis on assessment and professional development. Several of these recommendations already are underway as the energy of the self-study generated ideas to refine and improve the experience of new students. This study will guide the implementation of many of the action items over the next academic year and beyond. The findings of this important study also will help in the development of the Universityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s next strategic plan and the New England Association of Colleges and Universities self-study. Perhaps one of the most exciting outcomes of this initiative involves the campus coming together over an entire academic year, without regard to department, unit or rank, to think long and hard about what we already do or could be doing, to facilitate the success of the newest members of our community. The self-study is complete but the conversations have only just begun and will continue to move us forward in the years to come.

Introduction and Overview of the Project Westfield State University has much to celebrate. Our self-study found that, as an institution, we are strong, vibrant, caring and committed to our mission of providing a high quality educational experience in the liberal arts and professional fields. This mission provides a focus on teaching, advising and integrating students into the life of the University and the larger society. Westfield State Universityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s primary mission is to assist its students to develop intellectually and to use their knowledge and skills to improve the social and economic conditions in their communities. The University seeks to instill among members of its community a sense of social responsibility and citizenship.2

1. Socrates, in Plato, Dialogues, Apology 2. Westfield State University Mission Statement: http://www. wsc.ma.edu/about-westfield/ mission-statement 3. Foundations of Excellence (https:fyfoundations.org/ foetec/Default.aspx)

Our faculty and staff are talented, our campus is beautiful and our students are enthusiastic and hopeful. Our first-year retention rates are the envy of our peers, both public and private. Ninety one percent of our first-year students return after their first semester; 79% remain for their second year. The study made it is clear we are doing many things right. However, we are not an institution to rest on our laurels. It is important to us, as a community, to reflect upon and understand what we do well and consider thoughtfully what does not meet our standards of excellence. Given this institutional culture, it is no surprise the University enthusiastically embraced the opportunity to engage in a comprehensive study of the First Year.

To accomplish this goal of reflecting on the First Year, Westfield State University launched the National Foundations of Excellence (FoE) Study in the fall of 2010, encouraged and supported by President Evan Dobelle and Vice Presidents Hayes, Preston and Maloney. The University evaluated the first-year experience against the standards of excellence that are identified by the Gardner Institute. The Vision Statement for the Foundations of Excellence informed our plan of study. The Foundations of Excellence model is a blueprint for building the first year of college as the foundation for undergraduate education. Institutions that strive for excellence in the first year will conduct a candid analysis of their strengths and weaknesses. Based upon that analysis, they will then commit themselves to a course of action designed to improve first-year-student learning and success.3 The Foundation Dimensions Preamble for four-year institutions provided an aspirational model to help confirm our strengths and identify areas for improvement. The four assumptions identified by the Gardner Institute include:

• The academic mission of an institution is preeminent; • The first college year is central to the achievement of an institution’s mission and lays the foundation on which undergraduate education is built; • Systematic evidence provides validation of the Dimensions; • Collectively, the Dimensions constitute an ideal for improving not only the first college year, but also the entire undergraduate experience.4 The overall goal of this exciting initiative, simply stated, was to take a critical look at ourselves and how we, as an institution, shape the first-year experience of our undergraduates and then to make and apply recommendations for improvements based on this review. We worked collectively to identify our strengths and weaknesses in relation to the Foundations of Excellence principles and identify and recommend strategies and actions to improve our institutional response in order to provide the best possible experience for those new to our University. The University made a conscious decision to undertake this comprehensive study concurrent with the ten-year accreditation review process for the New England Association of Colleges and Universities. The decision was made to let the finding of the Foundations study inform our NEASC self-study and provide critical recommendations for our strategic planning. Westfield State University organized the First Year self-study in a manner similar to the NEASC review, complete with a steering committee and a task force comprised of a number of sub-committees organized around the Foundations of Excellence Dimensions. The University selected members of the FOE Dimension committees and the NEASC Standards committees with intentional overlap and careful representation from all University constituents including faculty, staff and students. The FOE project began in September of 2010 with a day-long launch led by John Gardner and members of his team. A group of 65 individuals from all walks of campus attended the launch.5 Many individuals from this group, 36 in all, continued on as members of the Steering and Dimension Committees. The study benefitted tremendously from the considerable expertise, collective wisdom and strong commitment of this collection of faculty, staff and students. 6

4. Foundations of Excellence Preamble 5. WSU Foundations of Excellence Launch Roster can be found in the Appendix 6. WSU Foundation of Excellence Dimension Committees roster can be found on page 5

The Foundations of Excellence framework provided structure and support to guide us through the assessment process. Key elements of this process included: The full Westfield State University Task Force of 65 organized into four working groups of approximately 36 individuals charged with assessing the nine Foundational Dimensions including: Philosophy and Improvement, Organization and Roles and Purposes, All Students and Transitions, and Learning/Faculty and Diversity. Performance Indicators, developed by the Gardner Institute, provided measurable criteria for each Dimension. The FOE Dimension Committees were asked to assign the University a grade for each Dimension, based on a review of relevant evidence. Westfield State University grades assigned by the task force ranged from B+ to D. The Current Practices Inventory and Evidence Library produced a comprehensive listing of all programs, policies and services that affect new students, either intentionally or indirectly. The inventory also included enrollment data and other statistical information. Westfield identified 125 specific programs, services, policies and related items.7 Faculty/Staff and Student Surveys developed by Educational Benchmarking were administered electronically to faculty/staff who work with firstyear students and to new first-year students and transfer students. The surveys were designed to collect data directly related to the Foundational Dimensions. Institution specific questions were added to the EBI survey instruments.8 Each Dimension Report draft was submitted to the Steering Committee liaison for perusal and feedback. The reports were also submitted to the Gardner Institute for feedback. The University process involved considerable assistance from Lisa Plantefaber and the Office of Institutional Research. (The Evidence Library and Current Practices Inventory9 can be found in the full electronic report) For the purposes of this study, the University defined first year to include: First-Year Students by Term and Full-Time/Part-Time Status Fall 2010

Spring 2011

First-Time Full-Time

First-Year Students

Summer (All sessions)

1132

First-Time Full-Time

Continuing Full-Time

109

1032

Continuing Full-Time 7. Foundations of Excellence, Evidence Library, FoETech 8. Westfield State University received survey responses from 61% faculty/staff (n.203) and 22% students (n.365) The surveys can be found in the full electronic report 9. Foundations of Excellence Current Practices Inventory

Summer Transfer Admissions: Fall Transfer Admissions: Spring Transfer Admissions:

6 8 349 176

FoE Committees – Membership

Foundations of Excellence

Group A: Philosophy and Improvement Dimensions (Steering Committee Liaison – Lisa Plantefaber) • Brian Cahillane (co-chair), Counseling Center • Jennifer DiGrazia (co-chair), English Department • Amy Szlachetka, Campus Center • Susan Krieg, Academic Achievement • Christine Irujo, Economics and Management Department • Jennifer Gould, Residential Life • Sergey Chumak, Student • Stephanie Close, Student (SGA)

Group B: Learning, Faculty, and Diversity Dimensions (Steering Committee Liaison – Marsha Marotta) • Jon Conlogue (co-chair), Residential Life • Azanda Seymour (co-chair), Academic Achievement • Andrea Bertini, Athletics • Kristina Knotts, Academic Achievement • Mary Allen Watson, MSSLS • George Layng, English Department • Corinne Ebbs, Library • Volker Ecke, Mathematics Department • Leticia Crespo, Student (SGA) • Dominick Farbo, Student (SGA) • Brittany Kinhart, Student (SGA)

Group C: Transition and All Students Dimensions (Steering Committee Liaisons – Susan LaMontagne/Daryl Hendery) • Shannon Broderick (co-chair), Residential Life • Andrew Bonacci (co-chair), Academic Affairs • Tony Casciano, Public Safety • Kelly Hart, Admissions • Jennifer Keenan-Jolie, Financial Aid • John Ohotnicky, Registrar • Joan Fuller, Urban Education • Joseph Shinn, Disabled Student Services • Meaghan MacDonald , Student (SGA) • Jesse Warren, Student • Kathryn Wojcik, Student

Group D: Organization and Roles and Purposes Dimensions (Steering Committee Liaisons – Susan LaMontagne/Daryl Hendery) • Nancy Bals (co-chair), Athletics • Maureen McCartney (co-chair), Academic Affairs • Jennifer Hanselman, Biology Department • Giselle Abed, Career Center • Kathi Bradford, Alumni Affairs • Lorri LaMagdelaine, TRIO Student Support Services • David Laing, MSSLS Department • Jessica Bartlett, Student • Matthew Dellea, Student

Steering Committee Liaisons Marsha Marotta, Dean of Undergraduate Studies Lisa Plantefaber, Associate Dean, Institutional Research and Assessment Susan Lamontagne, Dean of Students (Fall 2010) Daryl Hendery, Executive Assistant to the Vice President (spring 2011) Maureen McCartney, Associate Dean, writer of Self-Study Report

Themes Emerging from the Foundations of Excellence Study

Establish an Organizational Structure for Supporting and Enhancing the First Year Establish an Advisory Committee on The First Year Adopt a First Year Philosophy Designate a First Year Administrative Leader

Enhance Communication Around the First Year Experience Implement a Web-Based Case Management and Early Alert System Create Electronic Resource Pages for First-Year Students Develop a Clearinghouse of Resources on The First Year for Faculty and Staff

Create Ongoing Initiatives and Assessment Increase Exposure to Diversity in Academic Courses and Programming Develop Program Initiatives on the First Year Develop a Common Matrix for Assessment and Reporting

Themes Emerging from the Foundations of Excellence Study

The culmination of our year-long dedicated study is a series of ten comprehensive goals designed to create an intentional environment where first-year students can thrive and prosper. These goals center on themes of coordination, communication, academic connections, diversity, professional development and assessment. The centerpiece of the action plan is a campus-wide commitment to the importance of the First Year and a renewed spirit of collaboration from all campus constituencies designed to create a holistic environment that fosters success for all members of our community, particularly our newest members.

Westfield State University First-Year Themes 1. Establish an Organizational Structure for Supporting and Enhancing the First-Year 2. Enhance Communication around the First-Year Experience 3. Create Ongoing Initiatives and Assessment

1. E stablish An Organizational Structure For Supporting and Enhancing the First Year The Foundations of Excellence Dimensions Committees developed a wide array of recommendations designed to organize, coordinate, communicate, develop and enhance our response to our newest students. The implementation of many of these goals and objectives would benefit from the establishment of a campus-wide organizational structure to carry forward action items recommended after the thoughtful consideration of our working groups.

1.1 Establish an Advisory Committee on the First Year The Dimension Committees found that the University could reap considerable benefit from a campus-wide advisory structure dedicated to enhancing the First Year. The Committee would be charged with taking a holistic approach to the First Year, thinking broadly and comprehensively about how the University could enhance the experience to promote student success and a seamless transition to collegiate life. 1.1 KEY STRATEGY: Establish an Advisory Committee on the First Year SPECIFIC ACTIONS: Charge the Universityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s existing Enrollment Management Committee to integrate the work of an Advisory Committee on the First Year as one of the first action items of the 20112012 academic year. The Committee will further refine the First Year philosophy, explore first-year course proposals, and pursue other recommendations of the self-study for enhancing the experience of those new to the University. RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT/PERSONS: VP Enrollment Management, Dean of Undergraduate Studies, Dean of Students DATE: September 2011 RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: Existing Resources

1.2 Adopt a Philosophy for the First Year The Dimensions Committees recommended the adoption of a first year Philosophy to “inform relevant institutional policies and practices’ and guide our approach to the first year. A draft policy was developed for further consideration.

1.2 KEY STRATEGY/INITIATIVE: Adopt a Philosophy for the First Year SPECIFIC ACTIONS: Adopt a Philosophy for the First Year RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT/PERSONS: Advisory Committee on the First Year DATE: Fall 2011 RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: Existing Resources

1.3 Designate an Administrative Leader for the First Year The self-study found that the University is poised to define and implement many of the strategies of the Foundations of Excellence study; however, to do so will require continued leadership and campus support. The study recommends the selection of an upper-level administrator who will be responsible for coordinating these initiatives as a first step in this process. The position need not be new or dedicated but could be assigned to an administrator already closely aligned with the offices and processes critical to the new student. The administrative leader will guide discussions on a first year philosophy, explore models for firstyear courses, assist in the design and building of first-year student web resources, and explore grant funding among other initiatives. 1.3 KEY STRATEGY/INITIATIVE: Designate an Administrative Leader in the First Year SPECIFIC ACTIONS: Appoint Associate Dean of Academic Achievement, Maureen McCartney, as First-Year administrative leader to carry forward the recommendations of the self-study in collaboration with all campus constituencies. The Administrator will assume the administrative oversight, charged with providing leadership for first-year initiatives including coordinating the Advisory Committee on the First Year, implementing the University early alert system, enhancing First Year communications, and collaborating across campus to develop and enhance programming and support students in transition. RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT/PERSON: VP Academic Affairs, VP Student Affairs DATE: Summer 2011 RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: Existing Resources

2. E nhance Communication Around The First-Year Experience

2.1â&#x20AC;&#x201A; Implement a Web-based Case Management & Early Alert System The study recommends implementing a web-based communication system to coordinate services, conversations and interventions around students who may be at-risk as an important step to effectively and efficiently reach out to our first-year students. A role-based communication system will bring together individuals and units from a wide range of campus departments and faculty. This holistic approach will enable the community to respond in a timely manner to the needs and issues facing our new students. The early alert system/ communication system will manage case notes, systematize early academic warnings and coordinate response and follow-up while also providing data for research and assessment. The system, already under development, will provide an efficient and streamlined reporting mechanism for faculty while saving time and campus resources. 2.1 KEY STRATEGY/INITIATIVE: Implement a Case Management and Early Alert System SPECIFIC ACTIONS: The University will launch a web-based early alert system for students, providing a 360 degree perspective of at-risk students by connecting key personnel in Student Affairs, Academic Affairs, Athletics and Residential Life. For the first time, faculty will have the opportunity to provide early progress reports, considered critical for early intervention with at-risk students. Electronic case notes, tracking, and reporting and timely and efficient collaboration of all campus constituencies will also enhance student support. RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT/PERSONS: Maureen McCartney/Academic Affairs; Jon Conlogue, Student Affairs; Rudy Hebert/Tom Galanis/IT DATE: July 2011 RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: Three-Year License, Purchased June 2011: $37,500

2.2â&#x20AC;&#x201A; Enhance Communication about the First Year The Dimensions Committees found that the University already has a solid foundation for communicating with our prospective students. Our newly designed Prospective Student website is compelling, informative and easy to navigate. Survey results showed that the campus community believes enhancements to our Current Student webpage and the My Westfield pages could be helpful for new and returning students. Equally important is the creation of a First Year student website. Already under construction, this resource will serve as an effective means of communication with those transitioning to the University. While the focus will be on the undergraduate - parents, families and secondary supports will also be served by this resource designed to quickly and effectively welcome and guide our newest class to the information and resources they need to make a seamless and successful transition to the University.

A dedicated web presence with graphic appeal and easy navigation is possible. Suggestions for the New Student website and enhancing the Current Student section include the following: • An online checklist for Preparing for Advising • A calendar of important dates and events (such as Welcome Week, add/drop deadlines, registration, advising periods, timeline for housing deposits, student employment, Residential Life check-in and check-out timelines, reconciliation of incomplete grades, final examination schedules, and other important academic and campus life reminders. • A First Year Guide developed by peer tutors and staff highlighting strategies for success in the first year of college. • University Departmental Newsletters • A First Year Resource Center – The Dimension Committees found that first-year students would benefit from a centrally located First Year Resource Center. Given budgetary restrictions, this center could be attached to a readily available campus resource. The First Year Center would provide information and referral, focused workshops and seminars, a collection of University resources and drop-in advising for a wide range of first-year student needs. The Center would draw upon and benefit from the considerable talent and myriad of resources available across campus, including Advising, Career Services, International Programs, Residential Life, the Counseling Center, and Athletics. Faculty will also have an integral role in developing this important resource. The Center would report to the first-year administrator. The Center will begin as a virtual resource and evolve as a fixed asset following campus discussions. Another student resource under consideration is adding a chat module to the University website, to be managed by various campus personnel.

2.2 KEY STRATEGY/INITIATIVE: E nhance Electronic, Web and Related Communication about the First Year SPECIFIC ACTIONS: The University will develop and implement several communication strategies dedicated to enhancing the First Year. Initiatives will include creation of a dedicated first -year website, a first-year presence on My Westfield, and virtual first-year resources. The First Year Resource Center will begin as a virtual resource while various models are considered during the 2011-2012 academic year. Various social media tools will be integrated in the marketing/communication approach. RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT/PERSONS: Maureen McCartney, Academic Affairs; Alyssa Goodreau, Webmaster; Janet Garcia, Marketing; Tom Galanis, Information Technology; Lisa Plantefaber, Institutional Reasearch DATE: Summer 2011 RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: Existing Resources

2.3. Develop a Clearinghouse for First Year Resources for Faculty/Staff

A web-based clearinghouse for faculty and staff was recommended as a vital resource for data collection, best practices, institutional research, and dialogue on the First Year. Resource collections will include fact sheets on teaching those with learning differences, first-year transitioning, advising strategies for transitioning students and related topics. A University Resource Guide for campus personnel highlighting campus resources for student success is ready for publication with print and web versions and will be included in the clearinghouse. A First Year Profile, an annual profile of our newest students, including demographic information and related data will be developed and posted in early fall. 2.3 KEY STRATEGY/INITIATIVE: Develop a Clearinghouse for First Year Resources for Faculty/Staff SPECIFIC ACTIONS: Establish a clearinghouse dedicated to the first-year experience. Resources will include information on best practices, teaching and learning resources, and data on general and specific first-year students, research and related resources. RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT/PERSON: Maureen McCartney/ Academic Affairs, Andrew Bonacci/ Dean of Faculty, Faculty Center/ First Year Advisory Committee, Lisa Plantefaber/ Institutional Research, Tammy Bringaze/ Counseling Center, Megan O’Brien/ Health Services, Information Technology DATE: Fall 2011 RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: Existing Resources

3. C reate Ongoing Initiatives and Assessment 3.1. Increase Exposure to Diversity in Academic Courses and Programming Many of the self-study recommendations speak to the campus-wide need to address topics relative to promoting a culture of diversity on our campus. Several concrete recommendations emerged including personnel needs, campus conversations and dedicated programming around diversity. Recommendations included: • • • • •

Assign or appoint a Coordinator of Diversity Education Engage faculty, students and staff of diverse backgrounds Hire Admissions Counselors from diverse backgrounds Develop adjunct faculty positions for doctoral students of color Create a process to adopt a common book for first-year students each year and develop programmatic ties to special events, academic courses, and co-curricular activities. • Consider additional resources to support GLBT students

3.1 KEY STRATEGY/INITIATIVE: Increase exposure to diversity in academic courses and programming. SPECIFIC ACTIONS: Academic Affairs, Student Affairs, The Advisory Committee for the First Year and the campus community will consider and implement many of the Foundations of Excellence self-study recommendations related to enhancing exposure to diversity in our academic and co-curricular programs. RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT/PERSON: Andrew Bonacci, Dean of Faculty; Susan Lamontagne, Dean of Students; The Faculty Center; Advisory on the First Year Committee; Waleska Lugo-DeJesus; Jessika Murphy DATE: 2011 - 2013 RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: Multiple Funding Needs

3.2 Programmatic Initiatives on the First Year Academic Affairs, Student Affairs, the Advisory Committee for the First Year and the campus community will have the opportunity to consider many of the recommendations developed by the Foundations of Excellence taskforce related to enhancing our academic and extracurricular programs and services to meet the varied needs of our FirstYear students. These recommendations include the following: • Develop academic courses for first-year students • Encourage faculty to teach first-year students and intentionally select and support those with a demonstrated interest and ability for engaging new students. • Explore the addition and/or enhancement of learning communities • Consider models for first-year courses designed for all new students • Implement academic departmental orientation programs for first-year students • Enhance communication on the roles and purposes of higher education • Implement classroom initiatives on diversity • Create University-wide impactful service-learning initiatives • Discuss the importance of addressing diversity in both the University Mission Statement and the First Year philosophy. • Explore incentives to encourage faculty participation in new student orientation and welcome week activities and programs. • Discuss and develop expectations for faculty and staff that address the importance of the First Year, along with implementation of a reward system for those who excel in these initiatives. • Stimulate discussion on the roles and purposes of higher education. • Develop strategies to enhance faculty participation outside the classroom.

3.2 KEY STRATEGY/INITIATIVE: Develop Program Initiatives on the First Year SPECIFIC ACTIONS: Academic Affairs, Student Affairs, The Advisory Committee on the First Year and the campus community will consider many of the Foundations of Excellence self-study recommendations related to enhancing our academic and co-curricular programs and services to meet the varied needs of our first-year students. These initiatives may include first-year courses, exploration of models for First-Year Experience courses, common reading assignments for new students, service learning initiatives, learning communities, and more. RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT/PERSON: Marsha Marotta, Dean of Undergraduate Studies; Andrew Bonacci, Dean of Faculty; Susan Lamontagne, Dean of Students; Maureen McCartney, Associate Dean; The Faculty Center; Advisory Committe for the First Year. DATE: 2011 - 2013 RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: Multiple Funding Needs

3.3 Ongoing Assessment of the First Year The survey responses recommend implementation and/or enhancement of systematic assessment initiatives of new and existing programs, practices and services related to the First-Year. Understanding that assessment is the responsibility of all members of the community, these initiatives will help us to respond to what is most effective with our newest students. Recommendations include a review of what we do well, where we could improve, and how to accomplish these tasks efficiently and effectively. Sharing of these findings will help inform all members of the community. • Create a First-Year clearinghouse for sharing of resources and data • Engage in ongoing review and consideration of our Foundations self-study • Consider additional support for the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment • Develop assessment plans for new first-year programs and determine baseline measures against which to compare effects of first-year initiatives. • Implement assessment plans based on new initiatives. 3.3 KEY STRATEGY/INITIATIVE: Ongoing Assessment of the First Year SPECIFIC ACTIONS: The First-Year Clearinghouse will provide a useful tool for sharing and collaborating on First-Year initiatives, programs, practices and research. Ongoing review of the self-study will be regular components of the assessment initiatives. RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT/PERSON: Lisa Plantefaber, Institutional Research; Andrew Bonacci, Dean of Faculty; Advisory Committe on the First Year. DATE: 2011-2013 RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: Existing Resources

3.4 Implement Professional Development Programs The University has a number of resources and ample opportunity to provide training and professional development for all campus constituencies to enhance our response to the First Year. Individual professional development, Faculty Center workshops, conversations and sharing of best practices and mentoring are all important components of an ongoing dialogue on the First Year. Several recommendations that emerged during our self-study include: • Develop ongoing advisor training workshops and resources • Dedicate training for adjunct professors • Schedule faculty and staff workshops on specific issues related to the First Year • Utilize the First-Year Clearinghouse for resources, share of data and best practices on the First- Year, and collaborate on assessment initiatives • Create a faculty mentoring program

3.4 KEY STRATEGY/INITIATIVE: Implement Professional Development Initiatives on the First-Year SPECIFIC ACTIONS: Academic Affairs, Student Affairs, the Advisory Committe on the First Year. and the Faculty Center will consider a range of professional development opportunities and programs to enrich our campus community and enhance our academic and co-curricular programs, with particular emphasis on the first-year experience of our undergraduates. RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT/PERSON: Andrew Bonacci, Dean of Faculty; Susan Lamontagne, Dean of Students; The Faculty Center; Advisory Committe on the First Year. DATE: 2011 - 2013 RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: Multiple Funding Needs

These action items, carefully developed by our four committees along nine Dimensions, provide a framework for strategic interventions that address and respond to the unique and important needs of our first-year students. The action items represent a work in progress and are purposefully designed to promote cross-campus conversations and collaborations that break down silos and foster a holistic, responsive and energized community response.

Foundation of Excellence Report Card

The Foundations of Excellence process called for a report card as one of the final step in the self-study process. “It is the culmination of analysis and planning focused on the experiences of new students. Because these grades are based on judgments made by your campus task force, they are not intended to be used in comparison to any other institution or in a ranking system. The Foundations Report Card can be used most effectively as an indicator of relative grades within your institution. The grades reflect the best collective judgment of the task force and should be supported by the evidence collected during the project. Grades will not be made public by the Gardner Institute in any manner that identifies individual institutions”.10

Foundations Institutions approach the first year in ways that are intentional and based on a philosophy/rationale of the first year that informs relevant institutional policies and practices. The philosophy/rationale is explicit, clear and easily understood, consistent with the institutional mission, widely disseminated, and, as appropriate, reflects a consensus of campus constituencies. The philosophy/rationale is also the basis for first-year organizational policies, practices, structures, leadership, department/unit philosophies, and resource allocation. (Philosophy)

Foundations Institutions create organizational structures and policies that provide a comprehensive, integrated, and coordinated approach to the first year. These structures and policies provide oversight and alignment of all first-year efforts. A coherent first-year experience is realized and maintained through effective partnerships among academic affairs, student affairs, and other administrative units and is enhanced by ongoing faculty and staff development activities and appropriate budgetary arrangements. (Organization)

Foundations Institutions deliver intentional curricular and co-curricular learning experiences that engage students in order to develop knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviors consistent with the desired outcomes of higher education and the institution’s philosophy and mission. Whether in or out of the classroom, learning also promotes increased competence in critical thinking, ethical development, and the lifelong pursuit of knowledge. (Learning)

D+

Foundations Institutions make the first college year a high priority for the faculty. These institutions are characterized by a culture of faculty responsibility for the first year that is realized through high-quality instruction in first-year classes and substantial interaction between faculty and first-year students both inside and outside the classroom. This culture of responsibility is nurtured by chief academic officers, deans, and department chairs and supported by the institutions’ reward systems. (Faculty)

C-

10. Foundations of Excellence. Note: The Westfield Foundation of Excellence Report Card is based on grades submitted by the individual Dimension Committees rather than the Campus Task Force.

Foundations Institutions facilitate appropriate student transitions through policies and practices that are intentional and aligned with institutional mission. Beginning with recruitment and admissions and continuing through the first year, institutions communicate clear curricular and cocurricular expectations and provide appropriate support for educational success. They are forthright about their responsibilities to students as well as students’ responsibilities to themselves and the institution. They create and maintain curricular alignments with secondary schools and linkages with secondary school personnel, families, and other sources of support, as appropriate. (Transitions)

B-

Foundations Institutions serve all first-year students according to their varied needs. The process of anticipating, diagnosing, and addressing needs is ongoing and is subject to assessment and adjustment throughout the first year. Institutions provide services with respect for the students’ abilities, backgrounds, interests, and experiences. Institutions also ensure a campus environment that is inclusive and safe for all students. (All Students)

B-

Foundations Institutions ensure that all first-year students experience diverse ideas, worldviews, and cultures as a means of enhancing their learning and preparing them to become members of pluralistic communities. Whatever their demographic composition, institutions structure experiences in which students interact in an open and civil community with people from backgrounds and cultures different from their own, reflect on ideas and values different from those they currently hold, and explore their own cultures and the cultures of others. (Diversity)

C+

Foundations Institutions promote student understanding of the various roles and purposes of higher education, both for the individual and society. These roles and purposes include knowledge acquisition for personal growth, learning to prepare for future employment, learning to become engaged citizens, and learning to serve the public good. Institutions encourage first-year students to examine systematically their motivation and goals with regard to higher education in general and to their own college/university. Students are exposed to the value of general education as well as to the value of more focused, in-depth study of a field or fields of knowledge (i.e., the major). (Roles & Purposes)

B-

Foundations Institutions conduct assessment and maintain associations with other institutions and relevant professional organizations in order to achieve ongoing first-year improvement. This assessment is specific to the first year as a unit of analysis—a distinct time period and set of experiences, academic and otherwise, in the lives of students. It is also linked systemically to the institutions’ overall assessment. Assessment results are an integral part of institutional planning, resource allocation, decisionmaking, and ongoing improvement of programs and policies as they affect first-year students. As part of the enhancement process and as a way to achieve ongoing improvement, institutions are familiar with current practices at other institutions as well as with research and scholarship on the first college year. (Improvement)

The Student and Faculty/Staff Survey

The results of the Student Survey, while positive overall, showed some clear direction for improvements that could have a large impact on the overall first-year experience. Through regression analysis, Westfield State University’s support for the transition to college, supportive and safe campus environment, academic environment, pre-enrollment communication and opportunities for exposure to students of diverse backgrounds were shown to be the strongest predictors of overall student satisfaction with the first-year experience. (See Table 1). In all but the final factor, exposure to diversity, Westfield scored higher than or as high as other institutions. Since our score on exposure to diversity was low and it is has a moderate influence on overall student satisfaction, this is a high priority area for improvement. Table 1: Regression Analysis of Student Survey Factors and Comparison with Other Institutions Factor Description

Predictor Status

Peer Institutions

Carnegie Class

All Institutions

▲

▼

Factor 14. Overall Evaluation: Transition Support

1st Predictor

Factor 6. Campus Environment (All Students)

2nd Predictor

Factor 13. Overall Evaluation: Academic Gains

3rd Predictor

Factor 2. Pre-enrollment (Transitions)

4th Predictor

▼

Factor 8. Exposure (Diversity)

5th Predictor

▼

Factor 1. Structure and Support (Organization)

Non Predictor

Factor 3. Masking Connections (Transitions)

Non Predictor

Factor 4. Academic Advising (Transitions)

Non Predictor

Factor 5. Standards of Behavior (Transitions)

Non Predictor

Factor 7. Quality of Instruction (Learning)

Non Predictor

Factor 9. Interaction (Diversity)

Non Predictor

Factor 10. Motivation and Goals (Roles & Purposes)

Non Predictor

Factor 11. Transfer: Transfer Process (Transitions)

Non Predictor

Factor 12. Transfer: Campus Environment (All Students)

Non Predictor

▲

Dependent Variable

▲

Factor 15. Overall Evalution: Instruction

▲

▲ Your Institution has a statistically higher mean than the mean of the comparative group. ▼ Your Institution has a statistically lower mean than the mean of the comparative group. The results from the Faculty/Staff Survey were not as positive as those from the Student Survey. In the overall evaluation of both the first-year and transfer populations, faculty and staff scored the University lower than or the same as comparable institutions. Regression analysis identified student understanding of the purpose of education, the use of assessment and the formulation and

communication of a first-year philosophy as being areas of weakness with strong effects on the overall evaluation by faculty and staff. (See Table 2.) These survey results point to the importance of developing a guiding philosophy for our approach to first-year students which include a commitment to helping students understand the purposes of a college education. They also point to the importance of a comprehensive assessment system which examines both student learning outcomes and first-year program effectiveness.11

11. Analysis provided by Lisa Plantefaber, PhD, WSU Institutional Research

Table 2: Regression Analysis of Faculty/Staff Survey Factors and Comparison with Other Institutions Factor Description

Predictor Status

Peer Institutions

Factor 15. First-Year: Motivation and Goals (Roles & Purposes)

1st Predictor

▼

Factor 18. First-Year: Leveraging Assessment (Improvement)

2nd Predictor

▼

Factor 4. First-Year: First Year Structures

3rd Predictor

Factor 1. First-Year: Communication of Philosophy

Non Predictor

▼

Factor 2. First-Year: Common Philosophy

Non Predictor

▼

Factor 3. First-Year: Institution (Organization)

Non Predictor

▲

Factor 5. First-Year: Academic Advising (Transitions)

Non Predictor

Factor 6. First-Year: Standards of Behavior (Transitions)

Non Predictor

Factor 7. First-Year: Involvenent (Faculty)

Non Predictor

Factor 8. First-Year: Excellence in Teaching (Faculty)

Non Predictor

Factor 9. First-Year: Hiring Process (Faculty)

Non Predictor

Factor 10. First-Year: Addressing Unique Needs (All Students)

Non Predictor

▲

Factor 11. First-Year: Educational Environments (Learning)

Non Predictor

▼

Factor 12. First-Year: First-Year Instruction (Learning)

Non Predictor

▼

Factor 13. First-Year: Course Goals (Learning)

Non Predictor

Factor 14. First-Year: Exposure and Interaction (Diversity)

Non Predictor

Factor 16. First-Year: Professional Development (Improvement)

Non Predictor

Factor 17. First-Year: Use of Assessment (Improvement)

Non Predictor

Factor 19. First-Year: Overall Evaluation

Dependent Variable

Factor 20. Transfer: Philosophy (Philosophy)

Non Predictor

Carnegie Class

All Institutions

▲ ▼

▼

▼ ▼

Non Predictor

Factor 22. Transfer: Learning (Learning)

Non Predictor

Factor 23. Transfer: Communicate with Counterparts (Faculty)

Non Predictor

Factor 24. Transfer: Student Characteristics (Faculty)

Non Predictor

▼

Factor 25. Transfer: Academic Advising (Transitions)

Non Predictor

▲

Factor 26. Transfer: Educational Environment (All Students)

Non Predictor

Factor 27. Transfer: Motivation and Goals (Roles & Purposes)

Non Predictor

Factor 28. Transfer: Requirements (Roles & Purposes)

Non Predictor

Factor 29. Transfer: Assessment Information (Improvement)

Non Predictor

Factor 30. Transfer: Use of Assessment (Improvement)

Non Predictor

Factor 31. Transfer: Overall Evaluation

Non Predictor

▼

Factor 21. Transfer: Structure and Support (Organization)

▼

▲

▼

Summary of the Dimension Reports A summary of salient findings of the FOE self-study are reflected below.

Foundational Dimensions Foundations Institutions approach the first year in ways that are intentional and based on a philosophy/rationale of the first year that informs relevant institutional policies and practices. Foundations Institutions create organizational structures and policies that provide a comprehensive, integrated, and coordinated approach to the first year Foundations Institutions deliver intentional curricular and cocurricular learning experiences that engage students in order to develop knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviors consistent with the desired outcomes of higher education and the institutionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s philosophy and mission Foundations Institutions make the first college year a high priority for the faculty Foundations Institutions facilitate appropriate student transitions through policies and practices that are intentional and aligned with institutional mission Foundations Institutions serve all first year students according to their varied needs. Foundations Institutions ensure that all first year students experience diverse ideas, worldviews, and cultures as a means of enhancing their learning and preparing them to become members of pluralistic communities. Foundations Institutions promote student understanding of the various roles and purposes of higher education, both for the individual and society Foundations Institutions conduct assessment and maintain associations with other institutions and relevant professional organizations in order to achieve ongoing first year improvement.12

12. Foundations of Excellence

A Look at the Surveys

From the Student Survey We Foundâ&#x20AC;Ś

First-Year students are very positive about their Westfield experience! Overall, they are pleased with the support provided before their formal enrollment and during their transition to the University. Once on campus, they indicated a high degree of satisfaction with the quality of instruction, academic advising and the academic gains they have realized since September. Westfield already is doing many things well in support of our newest students, but could benefit from enhanced communication, collaboration and structure around the First Year.

Students were less confident on the level of exposure to Diversity (Social, Political, Cultural and Religious) and opportunities to interact with individuals from different cultures and backgrounds. Students were also less confident on the Roles and Purposes on their educations, i.e. how college can help in the achievement of life goals and their personal reasons for pursuing a college degree.

From the Faculty/Staff Survey We Found Only 15.1% of faculty/staff surveyed reported that an institutional philosophy for the First Year had been communicated to them. However, 64% of this group gave ratings of high or very high the institutional commitment to the success of first-year students. Almost 73% of this group reported confidence in their ability to correctly refer first-year students regarding administrative questions or academic rules. A larger group, nearly 83%, felt confident on where to refer students for help with coursework. More than 70% of the faculty and staff surveyed rated high or very high the University response to the unique needs of students with academic deficiencies, students with physical or learning disabilities, honor students and student athletes. However, only 56.6% report high to very high, the degree to which the University addresses the unique needs of racial/ethnic minority students. Faculty and staff respondents found the institution does a moderate job in helping students explore their motivation for getting a college education in terms of achieving life goals. Faculty/staff respondents were moderate in their opinion that the University has an integrated first college year that supports routine communication among discrete first-year functions. A similar number report only moderate collaboration between academic affairs and students affairs. Almost 50% felt they had a voice in decisions about first-year issues.

A Look at the Dimensions Philosophy Dimension Foundations Institutions approach the first year in ways that are intentional and based on a philosophy/rationale of the first year that informs relevant institutional policies and practices. The philosophy/ rationale is explicit, clear and easily understood, consistent with the institutional mission, widely disseminated, and, as appropriate, reflects a consensus of campus constituencies. The philosophy/rationale is also the basis for first-year organizational policies, practices, structures, leadership, department/unit philosophies, and resource allocation.13

From the Philosophy Dimension we learned… Westfield State University does not have a formal campus-wide philosophical statement that “informs relevant institutional policies and practices” and guides our approach to first-year students. Instead, we have an implicit philosophy that impacts our interactions with and guidance of first-year students. Recognizing the importance of drafting a statement, the Philosophy Dimension Committee proposed the following statement as a springboard for further dialogue and consideration campus-wide: Recognizing that students meet the transition to WSU with varied levels of preparation, support, ability and development, we seek to orient and begin the enculturation process of first-year students to the major themes of the University mission. Within the framework of our University’s resources, we strive to foster and promote a collaborative and dynamic climate, one that honors and supports the contributions and perspectives of each first-year student. In this environment, we create a support network to facilitate the process of lifelong intellectual, social, and ethical development while encouraging independence and civic engagement by providing the following dynamics and opportunities: Sustained and supportive engagement with staff, faculty, advisors and peers Intellectually stimulating academic classrooms environments where students’ academic and social development is fostered A range of pedagogical approaches to learning Residential accommodations that allow students to experience independent living in a safe and respectful environment Career guidance 13. Foundations of Excellence Dimensions 14. Adapted from the WSU Philosophy Dimension Committee Report

Community service and service-learning opportunities A safe social environment and exposure to university sponsored clubs, teams and activities.14

Transitions Dimension

Foundations institutions facilitate appropriate student transitions through policies and practices that are intentional and aligned with institutional mission. Beginning with recruitment and admissions and continuing through the first year, institutions communicate clear curricular and co-curricular expectations and provide appropriate support for educational success. They are forthright about their responsibilities to students as well as students’ responsibilities to themselves and the institution. They create and maintain curricular alignments with secondary schools and linkages with secondary school personnel, families, and other sources of support, as appropriate.15

From the Transitions Dimension we learned… Transitioning students and their families to the University is an important process that can span a year or more. A critical look at how we approach prospective students reveals that the University is very effective in communicating the “lived” experience for our transitioning students. Prospective students and their families are provided high quality print and electronic resources (brochures, web, videos and social media) in order to determine personal fit with the University. Our Admissions programs outreach and communications are highly regarded. Financial considerations are clearly communicated to students and their families in a variety of ways, generally and specifically. Newly admitted students are provided comprehensive New Student Orientation programs, attended by approximately 90% of new students. These programs are found to be very effective in acclimating transitioning students to the culture, academic experience, academic expectations, academic integrity, academic support services, and aspects of academic advising prior to arrival on campus. New Student Orientation and the University Bulletin are the primary means of communicating this information prior to matriculation. Some academic departments offer introductory courses, meetings, departmental handbooks and other strategies that are also very useful in conveying intellectual expectations. While our communication strategies are very effective for prospective students, two key vehicles for communicating specifically with the current student, the University web site and My Westfield (the University portal) are not considered to be nearly as effective or compelling. We also found weaknesses in several other important areas, namely communicating our institutional mission and sharing strategies for connecting students with out-of-class engagement opportunities, upperclassmen, and with off-campus and local organizations. Two important constituencies for the transitioning student, their families and secondary supports (i.e. high school counselors, business leaders, community organizations) are not offered the same level of attention during

15. Foundations of Excellence Dimensions

this transitioning period. While parents/families have the opportunity to participate in a Parent Orientation Program, and have a dedicated tab on the University website, it is not clear what, if any communication is provided beyond these initiatives. Opportunities for connections with faculty and the University during this important period were considered carefully and thoughtfully. Of considerable concern is the prevalence of adjunct faculty teaching first-year courses and how this practice impacts these important early opportunities for connecting to the University. Many adjunct faculty, by virtue of their temporary assignments, lack full orientation and integration in the life of the University. This may limit how effective they are in advising and referring students at critical junctures in their transition. Establishing these important connections once our new students are on campus is an area requiring attention.16

All Student Dimension Foundations Institutions serve all first-year students according to their varied needs. The process of anticipating, diagnosing, and addressing needs is ongoing and is subject to assessment and adjustment throughout the first year. Institutions provide services with respect for the students’ abilities, backgrounds, interests, and experiences. Institutions also ensure a campus environment that is inclusive and safe for all students.17

From the All Student Dimension we learned… Westfield State University has achieved considerable success in efforts to serve students according to their varied individual needs. A wide array of programs and support services are in place to address the unique needs of our undergraduate population. Specific attention is given to academic, personal, social, cultural and experiential differences. A review of critical resources reveals a high level of awareness of and specific support for students with learning differences, first-generation students, athletes, international students, veterans and active military, and those with low-income and/or diverse backgrounds.

16. Adapted from the Transitions Dimension Committee Report 17. Foundations of Excellence

Several instruments are utilized during New Student Orientation to assess academic strengths and weakness in the areas of Math, Reading, Writing and Information Literacy. Results of these placement tests guide course placement. Once matriculated, a myriad of academic supports are available and include our Reading and Writing Center, Tutoring and Disability Services, and counselors available in our Urban Education, and TRiO programs. Personal supports are provided through Health Services, the Counseling and Career Center, Residential Life, Academic Advising, and related services. Athletic Department interventions, including progress reports, mandated study halls, and monitoring of ‘at risk’ students, touch 10% of the new student population.

New initiatives for Veterans have proven effective and are well received. A relatively new Office of International Affairs provides valuable guidance and support for our growing population of international students. An active Sankofa organization works to provide support and mentoring for diverse faculty and staff, assist in recruitment and retention of diverse faculty, staff and students. A vibrant Honors Program provides academic, social, and residential opportunities for this growing population. A wide array of clubs and organizations exist to provide rich experiences for students with diverse interests. These include the International and Intercultural Club, Third World Organization, Urban Education Gospel Choir, Jewish Student Organization, Latino Association, among others. These clubs and organizations are introduced first at New Student Orientation and events during the academic year.

The physical and psychological safety needs are address very effectively through a wide range of programs and services provided by the campus Public Safety Office. Students, faculty and staff alike report a high level of overall confidence in feeling physically safe on our campus. The University Counseling Center provides necessary support for mental health concerns and also coordinates well thought of Letting Go workshops for parents and families during orientation. Two campus populations, commuting students and those who identify as GLBT, have been identified as warranting additional attention. Although a commuter council has been in place for many years and is widely known, active participation is problematic due to the multiple priorities of this population. Students are offered considerable freedom and support for forming new organizations and clubs to meet new and emerging interests.18

Organization Dimensions Foundations Institutions create organizational structures and policies that provide a comprehensive, integrated, and coordinated approach to the First Year. These structures and policies provide oversight and alignment of all first-year efforts. A coherent first-year experience is realized and maintained through effective partnerships among academic affairs, student affairs, and other administrative units and is enhanced by ongoing faculty and staff development activities and appropriate budgetary arrangements.19

18. Adapted from the All Student Dimension Report 19. Foundations of Excellence

From the Organization Dimension we learnedâ&#x20AC;Ś Westfield State University does not have formal structures, organizational schemes or concrete policies sufficient to claim an integrated, coordinated and comprehensive approach to the First Year. This lack of formal structure, however, does not suggest that we are not confident and capable as an institution in meeting the needs of our first-year students. There is considerable evidence of discrete units working collaboratively and effectively throughout the year for the benefit of our newest members. While the collaboration is evident, it is not always efficient or systematic. Instead, it is often program-by-program collaboration, without over-arching goals and objectives. This lack of structure makes it difficult to evaluate or assess the success of any given initiative. Departments may be duplicating efforts with personnel and resource implications. Coordinating these efforts could have a very positive impact on the delivery of programs and services Despite the lack of a formal structure, faculty and staff feel very confident knowing how and where to refer students for help with coursework, academic support, administrative matters, help with personal issues, campus involvement and information on academic rules and policies. Our surveyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s responses confirm students respond well to this confidence and feel the campus community guides them accurately and effectively. Faculty and staff also reveal a high level of confidence with the university support system for addressing the needs of students in specific cohorts, particularly those with learning differences, athletes, honor students, racial/ethnic subgroups, and students needing academic support. In fact, a significant number of open-ended survey responses indicate a perception of excellence in support for these populations and the programs. Support services in these areas were often noted as top strengths of how we, as a University, conduct the First Year of college. Despite the high level of confidence on these matters, faculty and staff reported feeling less satisfied by the level of encouragement by senior administration for partnerships and collaboration between academic and student affairs units. Similarly, they also reported a lack of personnel and fiscal support for first-year courses, coordination of routine communication, and having a voice in decision making concerning the first-year experience. Faculty and staff confidence regarding the first-year experience seems to be more of an individual matter rather than an institutionally driven or supported phenomenon

20. Adapted from the Organization Dimension Report

Faculty and staff are provided modest financial support for professional development. However, the University has not offered systematic or ongoing professional development specifically addressing the needs and experiences of first-year students. New faculty participate in a day-long faculty orientation where they have the opportunity to hear brief presentations from key campus personnel, many of whom offer programs and services applicable to the First Year. While helpful, the overviews are brief and are not provided for adjunct faculty, already identified as key players in the experience of first-year students. Ongoing orientation and training for all members of the university community would be a prudent and wise investment.

The research and evidence consulted during this study indicate that we have a wealth of resources, demonstrable spirit and a capable team that could only benefit from a modest level of integration, organization, leadership and support.20

Learning Dimension

Foundations Institutions deliver intentional curricular and co-curricular learning experiences that engage students in order to develop knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviors consistent with the desired outcomes of higher education and the institutionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s philosophy and mission. Whether in or out of the classroom, learning also promotes increased competence in critical thinking, ethical development, and the lifelong pursuit of knowledge.21

From the Learning Dimension we learnedâ&#x20AC;Ś Westfield State University provides an environment that promotes first-year student learning and success, but not one that describes or measures this learning in broadly adopted, precise and substantive ways. Westfield State University has a common core requirement which must be completed by graduation. The common core comes with a set of learning objectives; in fact, all courses proposed for inclusion in the core must demonstrate that they address these stated objectives. Similarly, all but one of our majors has learning objectives defined for the program. It is not clear, however, that the University community has engaged in ongoing discussions about these shared set of expectations regarding what our students should know, understand, synthesize and be able to apply upon graduation. An organization structure around the First Year would assist in the implementation of successful and sustained research, discussion, delineation, delivery and evaluation of firstyear programs, services and policies. One notable area of strength in learning is our English Composition Program, which has established clear learning goals that are communicated to first-year students during the first week of the semester. Since approximately 60 sections of Composition are offered over the fall and spring semesters combined, a sizeable percentage of students receive information about learning goals from this course. Faculty surveyed report communicating their own expectations and learning goals to first-year students. For example, 90% feel they communicate expectations to students. However, despite the wide dissemination of learning goals and expectations, only 57% reported documentation of achievement of student learning goals in their courses. Discussions about effective instructional methods occur formally and informally in settings including academic department meetings, training for ENGL 0101 faculty, and at the Faculty Center, a resource utilized to discuss a range of teaching issues from syllabus construction to pedagogical methods. The classes that offer the highest enrollment of first-year students (ENGL 101, PSYC 101, SOCI 101, MATH 108, and ART

21. Foundations of Excellence Dimensions

107) offer an array of instructional methods. While some efforts are made at the department level, there is no evidence to support the proposition that the university systematically seeks to better understand why courses are dropped or why high dropout rates exist within certain courses. Research on first-year courses, specifically those dropped, failed or those with significant withdrawals may provide valuable information for our first-year placements. In the co-curricular sphere, the Owl Advantage Program coordinated through Residential Life, has identified several learning objectives that track closely with first-year student needs and issues. The First Year Experience Seminar (FYEX) course is not currently offered; and when it was offered, it served a small percentage of self-selecting, incoming first-time students (25%). The course was not offered to transfer students. Out-of-class activities linked to academic courses or programs previously occurred through the FYEX course, with several out-of-class programs scheduled during the semester in conjunction with in-class material related to those programs. Currently, linkages between classroom and out-of-class activities happen primarily based on instructor initiative. Learning communities have been offered sporadically over the last several years, their provision being hampered by budget considerations. Service learning is a strong focus of the institution as reflected by academic department initiatives, service-oriented student groups, and several programs (including yearly Habitat for Humanity trips, the Community Service day for incoming students during Welcome Week in August 2010, and many others). The community service activity that regularly reached the greatest number of firstyear students was the 6-8 hour civic engagement requirement associated with the now-suspended FYEX course. The University has minimal coordination among these many community service activities making it difficult to apply a consistent set of assessment methods or first-year student learning outcomes. Residential Life has recently made a programmatic change which has resulted in the vast majority of first-time students being housed in two, all-first-year halls. As this changeover was made for 2010-2011, there is currently no data to provide useful feedback on the consequences and impact of this change on these first-year students. Similarly, the Owl Advantage program has adopted a student learning outcomes-based programming model and evaluation system for the 2010-2011 academic year; but data is not yet available to evaluate the impact of these changes on first-year students..22

22. Adapted from the Learning Dimension Report

Faculty Dimension

Foundations Institutions make the first college year a high priority for the faculty. These institutions are characterized by a culture of faculty responsibility for the First Year that is realized through high quality institution in First Year classes and substantial interaction between faculty and first-year students both inside and outside the classroom. This culture of responsibility is nurtured by chief academic officers, deans, and department chairs and supported by the institutions’ reward systems.23

From the Faculty Dimension We Learned… As previously noted, Westfield State University has had considerable success promoting overall student retention and graduation as compared to our peer institutions in Massachusetts. However, few specific, tangible programs are focused on identifying and addressing the varied, distinctive and significant needs, issues, and obstacles faced by first-year students, and these gaps are clearly reflected in information provided for, and reported by, our faculty. The Faculty Dimension Committee agreed that Westfield State University has ample opportunity to enhance communication about first-year students in order to enable faculty to better respond the needs of this population. This communication could include information about academic needs, demographic characteristics, and trends and issues related to specific populations. Encouraging faculty to connect with other institutions regarding transfer students would also be helpful in bridging this knowledge gap. The Committee recommended that extrinsic rewards and incentives be provided to promote faculty (and staff) behaviors consistent with prioritizing and meeting the needs of first-year students as compared to those of the general student population. Rigorous and comprehensive assessment of both existing and new programs and services targeted toward first-year students would help to document progress and provide direction on program and services expansions, changes and deletions. The University does not have programs specifically tailored for transfer students beyond the Transfer Orientation Program and the ‘transfer transition’ component of the Academic Advising Center. Generally, the University does not stress faculty responsibilities related to first-year students during candidate interviews, in position descriptions or during new faculty orientation. A positive exception to this can be found in the English Composition area, where expectations and pedagogical approaches are addressed in a variety of formats. Several newer initiatives might also provide models for improving the way faculty and departments approach the first-year. These include at least three departments (Biology, Movement Science and Physical Science) holding fall semester meetings for first-year and transfer students, and several departments offering first-year

23. Foundations of Excellence

only courses and mentoring. In addition, the Faculty Center runs numerous sessions for faculty on various aspects of pedagogy (including â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;engaging the first- year studentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;). English Composition also develops learning targets for first-time students.24

Roles and Purposes Dimension Foundations Institutions promote student understanding of the various roles and purposes of higher education, both for the individual and society. These roles and purposes include knowledge acquisition for personal growth, learning to prepare for future employment, learning to become engaged citizens, and learning to serve the public good. Institutions encourage first-year students to examine systematically their motivation and goals with regard to higher education in general and to their own University. Students are exposed to the value of general education as well as to the value of more focused, in-depth study of a field or fields of knowledge (i.e., the major).25

From the Roles and Purposes Dimension we learnedâ&#x20AC;Ś The University provides ample opportunities to encourage first-year students to examine systematically their motivation and goals for pursuing higher education before and during their academic career. We communicate the purpose of higher education to first-year students and are even more effective helping students to prepare for future employment. Westfield has demonstrated a commitment to helping students become engaged citizens. Overall, the University is committed to promoting student understanding of the various roles and purposes of higher education, both for the individual and society, through its programs and services, but may lack a unified and intentional approach. While students have opportunities to serve the public good, without the First Year Experience Seminar course, which required the completion of community service, first-year students are not serving the local community to the extent that they could. This program targeted first-year students as a whole and to encourage them to utilize the various campus resources and engage in the community.

24. Adapted from the Faculty Dimension Report 25. Foundations of Excellence Dimensions 26. Adapted from the Roles and Purposes Dimension Report

Students are exposed to the value of a general and focused education through the Common Core and major requirements, as clearly outlined in the Bulletin. By meeting the Common Core, students acquire competencies to communicate, to understand literature, society, and scientific theory, to appreciate the arts, and to use mathematical skills. Specific skills such as information literacy skills, computing skills, and writing skills are obtained by completing the Common Core requirements. The University also communicates its rationale for major requirements through the Bulletin. The requirements for each major are clearly outlined in each departmental section as well as a department description.26

Improvement Dimension

Foundations Institutions conduct assessment and maintain associations with other institutions and relevant professional organizations in order to achieve ongoing first-year improvement. This assessment is specific to the first year as a unit of analysis—a distinct time period and set of experiences, academic and otherwise, in the lives of students. It is also linked systemically to the institutions’ overall assessment. Assessment results are an integral part of institutional planning, resource allocation, decision-making, and ongoing improvement of programs and policies as they affect first-year students. As part of the enhancement process and as a way to achieve ongoing improvement, institutions are familiar with current practices at other institutions as well as with research and scholarship on the first college year.27

From the Improvement Dimension we learned… The Improvement Dimension Committee found that systematic efforts to understand the experience of first-year students at WSU, either through assessment of campus programs or through directed professional development for faculty and staff, are limited. Westfield State University’s assessment of programs for first-year students and student outcomes could best be described as variable. Some programs have robust internal evaluation mechanisms in place while others have had limited or no evaluation of their effectiveness. Where program evaluation does occur, it tends to focus on individual programs rather than the connection to the entire first-year student experience. Support for professional development related to firstyear student success in limited. The Committee agreed that it is not that faculty and staff lack interest in the issues but rather that information and logistical/financial support is insufficient. Based on the current situation, the University could emphasize the benefit of increased assessment of firstyear initiatives co-coordinated by and analyzed by an explicitly designated first-year oversight committee. Increased institutional support for faculty and staff professional development is also recommended. Similarly, opportunities to collaborate with colleagues from other institutions, locally, state-wide and nationally, would provide rich opportunities for learning and sharing. Athletics provides a strong model with collaboration state-wide through the Massachusetts State College Collegiate Athletic Conference (MASCAC) and nationally through Division III NCAA programs.28

27. Foundations of Excellence Dimensions 28. Adapted from the Improvement Dimension Report

Diversity Dimension Foundations Institutions ensure that all first-year students experience diverse ideas, world views, and cultures as a means of enhancing their learning and preparing them to become members of pluralistic communities. Whatever their demographic composition, institutions structure experiences in which students interact in an open and civil community with people from backgrounds and cultures different from their own, reflect on ideas and values different from those they currently hold, and explore their own cultures and the cultures of others.29

From the Diversity Dimension we learned… For purposes of this report, when data is cited on diversity as it relates to our university, it refers to gender, people of color, international populations of students and faculty, first-generation college students, as well as assessment of in-state and out-of-state students. The Diversity Dimension Committee notes that the University mission statement asserts that Westfield “offers a campus climate that respects the ideas, values, perspectives and contributions of a culturally diverse community.” In order for this effort to be effective, the group contends this must be mentioned as a core value within our community, and current faculty, staff and students must also act as models of tolerance on campus. Consequently, sustained efforts as it relates to diversity could also be clearly reflected within the mission statements, goals and strategic plans of the institution’s academic departments. According to the University’s strategic plan, one of the top priorities is for Westfield State to increase efforts to recruit and retain a diverse faculty, staff and student body, as well as create a welcoming and inclusive environment for students. Today, our campus is comprised of 22% first-generation college students, 11%students of color, and over 50 international students, scholars and faculty representing diverse cultures and viewpoints from more than 20 countries. However, there is room for improvement. Although a well-intended goal, Westfield State recognizes there is a lack of diversity that exists on our campus, but what we are doing to address this is unclear. The institution must be purposeful in educating our community about its goals to increase diversity on campus; and allocate resources for educating the campus community about the value of diversity along with continuous assessments to ensure that progress is being met and to determine the effectiveness of its efforts. 29. Foundations of Excellence Dimensions 30. Adapted from the Diversity Dimension Report

Survey results during the FoE process from faculty, staff and students demonstrate that Westfield State University still has a long way to go to accomplish its goal of increasing diversity and exposure to diversity. Three factors were considered when assessing the institutionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s progress: diverse ideas, interactions and behaviors. Survey participants agreed that Westfield State does an excellent job at communicating the importance of members of our community respecting those whose opinions are different, and they also agreed that students are isolated from interacting with others of diverse backgrounds and cultures outside of our. Conversely, faculty, staff and students had differing opinions relating to the institution attention to the importance of respecting the views of others whose religion, culture, and political ideas are different from their own.30

Conclusion The Foundations of Excellence study of the First Year at Westfield State University offered an opportunity to conduct a comprehensive review of our institutional programs, practices and policies related to the first year of college. This in-depth study, spanning over ten months, produced a series of exciting action items that will guide our efforts to enhance and improve all that we do as an institution to foster success during this important transitional period. The self-study was successful due to the significant contributions of many individuals across campus. Particular thanks are due to President Evan Dobelle for inspiring us to undertake this initiative and the Vice Presidents for their leadership and support. Our Steering Committee, comprised of Dean Marsha Marotta, Associate Dean Lisa Plantefaber and Dean Susan LaMontagne, provided ongoing guidance and tireless support to the Dimension Committees and served as our liaisons to the Gardner Institute. The Dimension Committees and their members devoted countless hours to their charge and produced comprehensive reports and recommendations. Last but not least, our colleagues at the Gardner Institute, specifically John Gardner, Betsy Barefoot and Drew Koch, provided the tools, resources and a framework to guide our work. We have learned a great deal during this process and stand ready to move forward with confidence and enthusiasm. Our newest students will only benefit from all that we have gleamed from this study and all that we now hope to accomplish to ensure a successful transition for each and every student.

Appendices Foundations of Excellence Task Force Launch Invitees EBI Survey Instrument (Available in electronic version) Faculty/Staff Surveys Student Surveys Full Dimension Reports (Available in electronic version)

Foundations of Excellence Task Force October 6, 2010 Launch

Cabinet Members Robert Hayes – Vice President, Academic Affairs (Fall 2010) Elizabeth Preston, Vice President, Academic Affairs (Spring 2011) Barry Maloney – Vice President, Student Affairs Carol Persson – Vice President, Enrollment Management Nanci Salvidio – Exec. Assistant to President/Associate Vice President, Advancement & University Relations Carlton Pickron - Dean, President’s Office/Diversity & Affirmative Action

Students Jessica Bartlett Sergey Chumak Stephanie Close Leticia Crespo Matthew Dellea Dominick Farbo Brittany Kinhart Meaghan MacDonald Jesse Warren Kathryn Wojcik

Faculty/Librarians Andrew Bonacci – Associate Professor/Music (Fall 2010), Dean of Faculty, (Spring 2011) Corinne Ebbs – Reference/Information Instruction Librarian/Library Jennifer DiGrazia – Assistant Professor/English Jennifer Hanselman – Assistant Professor/Biology Christine Irujo – Associate Professor/Economics & Management Ricki Kantrowitz – Professor of Psychology/Honors Program George Layng – Associate Professor/English Enrique Morales-Diaz – Associate Professor/World Language Studies (co-chair NEASC Steering Committee) Cheryl Stanley – Dean of Education Mary Allen Watson – Professor/Movement Science

Administration - Academic Affairs Joan Fuller – Director/Urban Education Kristi Knotts – Counselor/ Banacos Academic Center Susan Krieg – Assistant Director, Banacos Academic Center Lorri LaMagdelaine – Director/TRiO Student Support Services Maureen McCartney – Associate Dean/Academic Achievement Marsha Marotta – Dean of Undergraduate Studies John Ohotnicky – Registrar/Academic Affairs Jean Placzek – Staff Assistant/Academic Affairs Lisa Plantefaber – Associate Dean/Institutional Research Elizabeth Preston – Vice President (co-chair NEASC Steering Committee) Cynthia Siegler – Director, International Programs Azanda Seymour – Staff Associate/Academic Advising Joseph Shinn – Director/Banacos Academic Center Laurie Simpson – Director/Academic Advising Kimberly Tobin – Dean, Graduate & Continuing Education

Administration – Advancement & University Relations Kathi Bradford – Director/Alumni Relations Ken Magarian – Director of Special Projects

Administration – Enrollment Management Kelly Hart – Director, Admissions Jennifer Keenan-Jolie – Staff Assistant/Financial Aid

Administration – Student Affairs Giselle Abed – Assistant Director/Career Services Nancy Bals – Assistant Director/Athletics Andrea Bertini – Staff Assistant/Athletics Patricia Berube – Director/ Health Services Tammy Bringaze – Director/Counseling Center Brian Cahillane – Assistant Director/Counseling Center Tony Casciano – Associate Director/Public Safety Deborah Clifford – Director/Student Conduct Jon Conlogue – Executive Director/Residential Life Shannon Broderick – Staff Associate/Residential Life Cheryl Guimond – Staff Assistant/Student Affairs Daryl Hendery – Executive Assistant to the Vice President, Student Affairs Susan Lamontagne – Dean of Students Richard Lenfest – Director/Athletics Michael Nockunas – Director/Public Safety Amy Szlachetka – Director/Campus Center Richard Sutter – Assistant Director/Athletics

Foundations of Excellence – Strategic Plan 2011-13 Initiative

Strategy

1.1 Establish the Advisory Committee on the First Year 1. Establish Organization for Supporting and Enhancing The First Year

Specific Actions Charge the University’s existing Enrollment Management Committee to integrate the work of the Advisory Committee for the First Year

Responsible Department/ Person

Implementation Milestones

Resource Requirements

Benchmarks and Evaluation

VP AA and VP SA

September 2011

Existing Resources

Committee designated and charged; holds regular meetings; publishes minutes from meetings; produces annual report including progress on charge.

Advisory Committee on the First Year

Fall 2011

Existing Resources

Philosophy adopted by campus governance

VP AA and VP SA

Summer 2011

Existing Resources

Administrator appointed and charged; produces annual report in conjunction with Committee including progress on charge

Add Waleska Lugo-DeJesus and Shannon Broderick to the Advisory Committee

1.2 Adopt a First Year Philosophy

1.3 Designate a First Year Administrator

Review and refine draft Philosophy Statement Vet Philosophy campus-wide for adoption Name Associate Dean Maureen McCartney as First Year Administrator and develop charge

Early warning system implemented and utilized within Academic Achievement/ Athletic/ Student Affairs

Select and purchase software system in consultation with key personnel 2.1 Implement an Early Alert & Case Management System

Market system to campuscommunity

Maureen McCartney, Rudy Hebert, Jon Conlogue

Summer/Fall 2011

Purchase Software-2011 (3 year license)

Train faculty and staff

Determine % Participation

Implement and evaluate system Develop a dedicated First Year website for students and families

Maureen McCartney, Alyssa Goodreau, Janet Garcia, Tom Galanis

Summer 2011

Required Resources

First Year & Parent website launched

Develop a First Year Newsletter

Maureen McCartney Advisory Committee on the FY

Fall 2011

Existing Resources

First-year newsletter published

Research and consider model/home for Resource Center

VP AA and VP SA, Maureen McCartney, Laurie Simpson, Junior Delgado, Shannon Broderick

Summer/Fall 2011

Existing Resources

Model determined, space/staff for center indentified. First Year center launched online, evaluate effectiveness through # of hits, survey during advising

Develop First Year Resource Center as first step

Advisory Committee on the First Year

Fall 2011

Existing Resources

First Year Profile Published

Develop online CHAT

Maureen McCartney

Fall 2011

Existing Resources

Chat tool implemented

Maureen McCartney, Andrew Bonacci, Advisory Committee on the First Year, Faculty Center, Tammy Bringaze, Megan O’Brien

Fall 2011

Resources Required

Clearinghouse established

2011-2013

Resources Required

Diversity initiatives implemented; establish objectives and instruments to assess results

2011-2013

Resources Required

Programs developed, implemented and evaluated

2011-2013

Existing Resources

Assessments developed and implemented

2011-2013

Resources Required

Programs developed, implemented and evaluated

Review and enhance myWestfield with First Year students in mind 2. BUILD COMMUNICATION TO ENHANCE THE FIRST YEAR

2.2 Enhance Communication about the First Year

2.3 Develop a Clearinghouse for First Year resources for faculty/staff

Consult IT on First Year Clearinghouse Market Clearinghouse Collect, post, and refine resources

Implement initiatives related to diversity. Create process Andrew Bonacci, to adopt a common book for 3.1 Increase exposure to Susan Lamontagne, Waleska first-year students each year, diversity in academic courses Lugo-DeJesus, Jessika Murphy, and develop programmic ties and programming The Faculty Center, Advisory to special events, academic Committee on the First Year courses, and co-curricular activities Consider academic courses designed for First Year students Consider models for First Year Experience seminars 3.2 Develop Programmatic Initiatives on the First Year 3. CREATE ONGOING INITIATIVE AND ASSESSMENTS OF THE FIRST YEAR

Marsha Marotta, Maureen McCartney, Andrew Bonacci, Susan Lamontagne, The Faculty Center Advisory Committee Stimulate discussion on for the First Year, Shannon roles and purposes of higher Broderick, Brian Cahillaine education Consider Learning Communities

Develop strategies to increase faculty involvement oustide the classroom

3.3 Engage in Ongoing Assessment of the First Year

Develop assessment plans for new first year programs and determine baseline measures Lisa Plantefaber, Advisory Comagainst which to compare ef- mittee on the First Year, Andrew fects of first year initiatives Bonacci, Jess Hufnagle Implement assessment plans based on new initiatives Develop advisor training workshops and resources

3.4 Implement campus-wide professional development related to the First Year

Establish a faculty mentoring program related to the needs of first-year students Schedule workshops on the First Year

Andrew Bonacci, Susan Lamontagne, The Faculty Center

Progress Update