|Wednesday, November 8, 2017|
|Timothy Renick, Ph.D., Georgia State University
Vice President for Enrollment Management and Student Success, Vice Provost, and Professor of Religious Studies
Presentation: How Georgia State University Eliminated Achievement Gaps Using Data and Analytics
Timothy Renick has served as Chair of the Department of Religious Studies and Director of the Honors Program. Since 2008, he has directed the student success and enrollment efforts of the university, overseeing among the fastest improving graduation rates in the nation and the elimination of all achievement gaps based on students’ race, ethnicity or income level. Dr. Renick has testified on strategies for helping university students succeed before the U.S. Senate and has twice been invited to speak at the White House. His work has been covered by the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and CNN and cited by President Obama. He was named one of 2016’s Most Innovative People in Higher Education by Washington Monthly and was the recipient of the 2015-16 Award for National Leadership in Student Success Innovation. He currently is principal investigator for a $9 million U.S. Department of Education grant to study the impact of proactive, predictive-analytics-based advisement on ten-thousand low-income and first-generation students nationally. A summa cum laude graduate of Dartmouth College, Dr. Renick holds his M.A. and Ph.D. in Religion from Princeton University.
|Thursday, November 9, 2017|
|Richard Pattenaude, Ph.D., Ashford University
President Emeritus and Professor of Political Science
Presentation: Rocks, Shoals and Storms Along the Course to Institutional Success
Dr. Richard Pattenaude joined Ashford University in October, 2012 and served as its President and Chief Executive Officer until May, 2016. Dr. Pattenaude spearheaded Ashford University’s strategic planning and accreditation process. In June, 2013 Ashford University obtained initial accreditation from the Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and Universities of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC). He is currently a full-time Professor of Political Science at Ashford.His previous leadership positions include Chancellor of the University of Maine System, President of the University of Southern Maine, Vice President for Academic Affairs at Central Connecticut State University, and Associate Dean of Arts and Sciences at Drake University. He served as Vice-Chair and Chair of the Commission on Institutions of Higher Education for the New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC).Active in the community he currently serves on the Boards of San Diego United Way, the California VetFund Foundation, the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning (CAEL), the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA), and the California Chamber of Commerce.Dr. Pattenaude earned a Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Colorado and a B.A. in Economics from San Jose State University. He is a Vietnam Veteran. He resides in San Diego, California.
|Friday, November 10, 2017|
|Mike Tamada, Reed College
Director of Institutional Research
Presentation: Change is in the air. What should you do? What should we do?
Mike Tamada is the Director of Institutional Research at Reed College in Portland, OR. Prior to that, he had worked in institutional research for over 20 years in California and served CAIR in a variety of capacities including independent segment representative on the board of directors and vice-president (and briefly president before departing for Oregon). He is currently on the board of directors for AIR.
Wednesday – 2:45pm to 3:30pm
Student Engagement: From Raw Data to Meaningful Visualizations and Conversations Presented by Svetlana Deplazes and Meeta Goel
In this session we will describe our approach of using CCSSE and SENSE results for assessment of institutional learning outcomes, pathway model, etc.; demonstrate how Tableau could be utilized to present CCSSE and SENSE results more effectively in order to provide the constituents with the means of gaining greater insight to develop action plans for continuous improvement.
The objectives are: (1) share our approach of using survey results as an indirect assessment measure of various aspects of the student college experience and institutional effectiveness; (2) “look under the hood” of the data preparation for building effective visualizations in order to present, disaggregate, and disseminate survey results; and (3) have a discussion about strategies related to survey outcomes usage at other institutions across the state.
Wednesday – 4:45pm to 5:30pm
Reenergizing Your Role – Professional Development for Seasoned Institutional Researchers Presented by Kristina Powers, Kelly Wahl, Sereeta Alexander, Heather Brown and Erika Jackson
Professional development encourages employees to learn new information, grow, and consider new ideas that will result in increased skillsets for the individual and the organization. Organizations have a mutual interest in professional development in that employees who attain more skillsets can perform more complex work and/or complete existing tasks with greater efficiency – thus continually improving processes and procedures for the individuals they serve.
Given the relative newness of the field of institutional research, professional development for institutional researchers has predominately focused on new institutional researchers. This has been in large part in response to a growth of new IR positions over the last 20 years. However, a new need is emerging – professional development for more seasoned (5 years+) institutional researchers serving in the same role.
When studying professional development, there are a plethora of best practices and tips for new professionals and those new to a role, such as meet with key stakeholders, listen a lot before making decisions, examine prior reports, etc. What advice and recommendations are there for employees serving in their same role for 5 or more years?
Results from interviews with seasoned institutional researchers regarding advice, experiences, and perspectives will be shared for reenergizing your role. A panel of California seasoned institutional researchers will share their thoughts before inviting audience participation. The panelists bring a variety of perspectives not only in institutional type, but longevity at institutions and positions, as well as sharing insights from starting new roles and institutions after serving in a role for a significant period of time (i.e., 5+ years).
Attendees will receive a list of strategies and suggestions based on the research and panelists comments. Time will be reserved for attendee questions for panelists as well.
Thursday – 8:00am to 8:45am
Addressing the Faculty-Staff Divide (Round Table Discussion) Presented by Carole Wolf and Gregg Thomson
This session outlines the approach that Saint Mary’s undertook to collect staff perceptions of working with faculty. We will note that while there are a large number of studies focused on diversity awareness among faculty and students, there is relatively little research that concentrates on faculty and staff interactions–sometimes referred to as the “faculty-staff divide” (Krebs, 2003).
We will provide the institutional context for our research. When WASC issued a Notice of Concern to Saint Mary’s College (SMC) in 2008 over issues of diversity and civility, the College’s response was immediate and strong. In addition to adopting new programs, SMC created three in-depth Campus Climate Surveys to measure overall perceptions of the campus climate and environment for students, faculty and staff. Though WASC removed the Notice in May 2010, we continue to administer the climate surveys every two years. However, in reviewing our surveys we realized that key aspects of faculty-staff relations are not addressed.
We describe the steps we took to develop our survey, including decisions about who to survey and the types of questions to include. We decided to survey the 80 staff identified as working in academic departments and 56 responded.
Staff members were asked to both rate various observed behaviors and attitudes and to tell their own stories (both positive and negative). In presenting our results we identify both those dimensions of faculty-staff relations that are especially problematic and those that are not and the extent to which results vary by department.
Thursday – 9:00am to 9:45am
Key Performance Indicators – From Scorecard to Visual Dashboards Presented by Rodney Reynolds, Melinda Medlen, Cathy Alexander, Samantha Allen, Andrea Cruz
The session will walk attendees through the collaborative approach taken to successfully transition the production of the University’s Strategic Plan Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) into the Office of Educational Effectiveness and Institutional Research (EEIR). Presenters will discuss how they transformed the original KPI Scorecards into a series of visual dashboards inspired by the AiR workshops, “Introduction and Advanced Dashboards in Excel”, by Craig Abbey.
The presenters will share the challenges and successes in how they developed and implemented the KPI visual dashboards and moved the production ownership into EEIR. They will discuss how the team re-envisioned the nature and the scope of reporting KPIs. Discussion will include how they built a case for the change of ownership of the data reporting and created visual dashboard prototypes to share with the Provost and President for approval and recommendations.
Other discussion points include how members of the team worked collaboratively with each Vice President to establish and document methodology for each data point in their individual Board Committee KPI dashboards and how this lead to the development of an inventory. The inventory includes the office or individual responsible for each data point, benchmarking goals, data source, and a timeline for data availability.
Attendees will have access to the dashboard prototypes and KPI inventory.
Thursday – 11:15am to 12:00pm
WSCUC Updates for Institutional Researchers Presented by Linda Petersen and Kristina Powers
This session is designed for Institutional Researchers at WSCUC institutions, and will provide updates on data collection efforts. The primary focus will be on the Graduation Rate Dashboard (GRD), and will include the interpretation and application of results for a range of institution types. Factors affecting the Absolute Graduation Rate will be addressed, and the use of these data beginning in spring 2018 as part of accreditation, reaffirmation, and mid-cycle reviews will be discussed.
Thursday – 2:15pm to 3:00pm
IR Boot Camp: How to Win Allies and Influence Leadership Presented by Amber Machamer, Audrey Thomas and Noam Manor
IR has valuable data and analyses, and must strategize to influence and collaborate with leadership to promote evidence-based decisions. Now more than ever, leadership in higher education needs to draw upon the expertise in its IR office. The simple and powerful strategy of the IR Boot Camp leverages the knowledge already housed in an IR office. The Boot Camp allows IR professionals to showcase works, highlight the role of IR on campus, and network across the institution. The Boot Camp becomes a critical component of leaders’ onboarding.
Boot Camp attendees believe it provides them with an edge to better understand and serve the institution. Leaders that come from within the campus gain insights beyond their unit or department and are able to understand trends, larger issues, and the campus as a whole.
CAIR attendees will come away with a plan to raise the visibility of their office on campus and increase the use of data to influence decision-making. This workshop will be hands-on with small group breakouts. We will also share some of our lessons learned, best practices and we look forward to improving our own Boot Camp with the input and experiences of our IR colleagues.
Thursday – 3:30pm to 4:15pm
Navigating Substantive Change Presented by John Hausaman
Learn the basics of the substantive change review process. This workshop is designed to provide participants with the tools needed to assist their institutions with the development of substantive change proposals in order to incorporate the approval process into planning and resource allocation. Any recent changes in federal and WSCUC policy will be discussed. Examples of good practices and model elements, including resources and templates to help you get through the process successfully, will be shared. We will also look at common reasons why substantive change proposals are not approved and provide tools for avoiding these pitfalls. We will leave time at the end for individual questions about your upcoming proposals.
Director of Substantive Change and Committee Relations
WASC Senior College and University Commission
Thursday – 3:30pm to 4:15pm
Using Longitudinal data with Data Envelopment Analysis to optimize resources Presented by F.T. Eleuterio
Bench-marking methods are often used to conduct academic program reviews and to plan for future departmental improvements. Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is an optimization method that may be used to identify academic departments within a comparator group that have achieved optimal results in using faculty resources to deliver instruction. For programs not operating at the optimal level, DEA may be used to produce best virtual programs consistent with the most efficient programs to suggest specific future performance improvement targets.
The success of the DEA method depends upon a peer-group of close comparators to provide the data for analysis. To meet this prerequisite of the DEA method, peer selection that is data-informed and objective can identify similar programs that might not typically be included in a Carnegie or regional group.
In this project, peer group selection was conducted using a structural equation latent class model and subsequent cluster analysis to establish a discipline focused peer group for DEA comparisons. Our model is based on data from the 2012-2105 cohorts of the Delaware Cost Study for all four-year institutions in all Carnegie classification groups. We concentrate on a case study selected for its ability to demonstrate key strengths of the DEA approach.
The example is based on actual data and illustrates both the similarities and differences based on the inherent variability that may be observed in a discipline-focused analysis of a bench-marking peer group. Examining differences among peers allows for actionable guidance to increase specific types of student credit hour production.
|Francis Thomas Eleuterio
Higher Education Consortia
Office of Institutional Research
University of Delaware
Friday – 10:15am to 11:00am
IPEDS in the Know – News, Upcoming Changes, and Helpful Resources for Data Providers and Users Presented by Kristina Powers
The institutional research office is typically tasked with managing one, more, or all IPEDS surveys. Given that this federal request for data and information is tied to the institution’s ability to award Title IV student financial aid, submitting accurate and timely information is critical. As such, those involved with the data and information submission need to have access to the latest information in order to submit the most accurate data possible. Therefore, this session exposes attendees to the latest information, learning resources and tools to do the best job possible in submitting their IPEDS data.
Additionally, many institutional researchers also use IPEDS data. Therefore, it is important for data users to understand the changes in data collection so that they can accurately interpret the data for decision-makers at their institutions. Time-saving tips and tricks that may not be as well known will be shared so data users can be more efficient in their IPEDS analyses.
Presented by a seasoned national IPEDS Educator, serving more than 10 years, important information for data providers and data users will be shared: 1) the latest information and upcoming changes to IPEDS surveys for the 2017-18 reporting cycle, 2) on-demand resources regarding IPEDS, and 3) lesser-known IPEDS resources, that are helpful to completing submissions and using IPEDS data. Time will be reserved for attendees to ask questions.
|Kristina Powers, Ph.D.
K Powers Consulting Inc.
Friday – 10:15am to 11:00am
Gauging Student Equity: Methods for Measuring Disproportionate Impact Presented by Caroline Ramirez-Faghih and Ryan Fuller
In order to measure disproportionate impact, there are currently three methods in practice: (1) proportionality index; (2) 80% index; and (3) percentage point gap method. The proportionality index and the 80% index have been widely used in practice at most community colleges. In particular, the 80% index has been used extensively in the report: Ensuring equitable access and success: A guide to assessing and mitigating disproportionate impact in student success and support programs (California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, 2013). However, there are issues with using the proportionality index and the 80% index, especially when subgroups have small sample sizes, which typically happens in smaller community colleges. The proportionality index does not have a specific threshold to identify disproportionate impact, while the 80% index method also has problems with establishing the reference group in the formula.
Although the percentage point gap method is easier to use and interpret compared to the other formulas, this method requires adjustments to the margin of error depending on the sample size. The formula for the standard normal for proportions, which has the percentage point gap in the numerator, will then be introduced and recommended for smaller samples, in order to avoid adjusting the margin of error. The presentation will show examples of the various methods with a focus on analyzing disproportionate impact of degree completion rates by ethnicity.
California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office
California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office
Friday – 11:15am to 12:00pm
Data-Informed Decision Cultures Presented by Leah Ross, KC Greaney, Kristina Powers and Mike Tamada
Data-informed decision cultures are rooted in an institution’s approach to data use and data capacity. These cultures recognize and support expanded sets of decision makers (data use) and the IR function (data capacity). In its most mature state, a data-informed decision culture is a highly dynamic and interactive network of units that support each other in the pursuit of institutional goals. This session features the pillars of data-informed decision cultures, considers different lenses with which to examine these cultures, and encourages dialog about the ways in which IR professionals can help institutions achieve and sustain them.
The moderator will provide an overview of the pillars of data-informed decision cultures and a model that examines the intersection between data use and data capacity. The content that informs this session includes the Statement of Aspirational Practice for IR (AIR, 2016), A New Vision for IR (Change magazine, 2016), and Data-Informed Decision Cultures (AIR, 2017). 5 minutes will be spent on the topic overview, 15 minutes on panelists’ perspectives, and 30+ minutes will be devoted to dialog.
The topic is relevant to CAIR attendees because of their roles in the IR community. Key take-aways include the concept of the IR function, the ways in which data use and data capacity intersect, and the importance of our roles in contributing to data-informed decision cultures, regardless of our levels of experience, our scopes of authority, and the challenges and opportunities present at our institutions.
Senior Director for Research and Initiatives
Association for Institutional Research
Santa Rosa Junior College
|Kristina Powers, Ph.D.
K Powers Consulting Inc.