Abstract

More than just getting input, we used focus groups to build a policy, grow support, and fast-track implementation. For our small tuition-dependent university, admissions standards are a politically charged topic. A small team began by creating data-driven admission criteria. We then used focus groups to engage with stakeholders campus-wide. Each focus group began with a brief presentation, and then quickly transitioned into a guided dialogue. The meetings allowed the team to find and address points of opposition. By the time the proposal went to the full faculty body and administration, most of the potential critics had already been engaged. This session will present the focus group methodology used to build consensus.

Woodbury University 211/20/2014

Slides online at profgarrett.com


Why are we here?

Timeline

Summer ‘13: Began Process

Fall ‘13: Approved Faculty

Spring ‘14: Approved Cabinet/President

Spring ’15: Implementation

2.75 GPA Admission Policy Proposal

Domestic freshmen entrants need a minimum High

School GPA of 2.75.

SAT ignored, and Scholarships based on HS GPA.


Questions welcomed at any time

11/20/2014 Woodbury University 5

Outcomes

1. Understand our focus group methodology

2. Recreate useful data displays

3. Describe ways to overcome resistance with data

Agenda

1. Methodology/Process

2. Concerns & Questions

Methodology/Process


What is a focus group?

• Guided discussion

• Understand new or complex issues

• Originally used in marketing research


May-August ’13

August-September

October-February

Process

Woodbury University 8

Developed

Policy

Interviews

Focus

groups

Data

Gathering

11/20/2014

Use a traditional focus group to generate quick, rich, and slightly-biased data

Advantages

• Low cost & fast

• Messy or unstructured problems

• Authentic participant voices

Disadvantages

• Groupthink/dominant voices

• Non-quantifiable/statistical

• Biased selection

• Poor for sensitive topics

• Can be shallower than interviews


Use a traditional focus group to generate quick, rich, and slightly-biased data and agreement

Advantages

• Low cost & fast



Disadvantages







Use a traditional focus group to generate quick, rich, and slightly-biased data and agreement

Advantages

• Low cost & fast



• Groupthink


Disadvantages







Ideal focus group elements

• Location• Neutral

• Round table

• Participants• 6-10 people

• Sample• Avoid power differentials,

• Homogeneity for comfortable discussions.

• Diverse to avoid groupthink

• Confidential

• Sessions• Continue until saturation

• Moderator• Starts with open-ended

questions

• Probes into responses

• Neutral

• Data• Note-taker or a/v recording

• Coded for analysis


Focus Group Participants• Build initial dataset

• Bruce/Nathan

• Admissions• VP Enrollment, Dir. Enrollment

• All admissions staff

• Student Support • VP, Dean, Director

• Academic Leadership• Chairs

• Deans (one-on-one)

• Faculty/Community• Colloquium presentation• Educational Planning Committee

• Senate/WUFA

• Cabinet/President

• Cross-disciplinary meetings


Staff, 35%

Faculty, 50%

VPs, 15%

11/20/2014

What we did wrong

Ideal

Neutral Facilitator

Gather participant voices

Getting data

Reality

Data-driven facilitator

Build proposal & consensus

Building/displaying data


The Result

1 Paragraph proposal

3 Page explanation

15 Pages of Q&A


Why not use the SAT?


High School GPA SAT Verbal SAT Math

Pearson Correlati

on

Sig. (2-tailed)

N Pearson Correlati

on

Sig. (2-tailed)

N Pearson Correlati

on

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

Is the student male? -.134 .000 680 -.035 .317 823 .112 .001 823 Is the student Hispanic?

.005 .890 680 -.144 .000 823 -.136 .000 823

Is the student in a studio course?

.052 .184 659 .079 .026 793 .145 .000 793

Has the student graduated?

.213 .000 680 .043 .220 823 .060 .086 823

High School GPA .278 .000 577 .330 .000 577

SAT Verbal .278 .000 577 .513 .000 823

SAT Math .330 .000 577 .513 .000 823 Fall Freshman Year GPA

.493 .000 662 .244 .000 800 .198 .000 800

Spring Freshman Year GPA

.489 .000 604 .267 .000 733 .161 .000 733

11/20/2014

High School GPA SAT Verbal SAT Math

Pearson Correlati

on

Sig. (2-tailed)

N Pearson Correlati

on

Sig. (2-tailed)

N Pearson Correlati

on

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

Is the student male? -.134 .000 680 -.035 .317 823 .112 .001 823 Is the student Hispanic?

.005 .890 680 -.144 .000 823 -.136 .000 823

Is the student in a studio course?

.052 .184 659 .079 .026 793 .145 .000 793

Has the student graduated?

.213 .000 680 .043 .220 823 .060 .086 823

High School GPA .278 .000 577 .330 .000 577

SAT Verbal .278 .000 577 .513 .000 823

SAT Math .330 .000 577 .513 .000 823 Fall Freshman Year GPA

.493 .000 662 .244 .000 800 .198 .000 800

Spring Freshman Year GPA

.489 .000 604 .267 .000 733 .161 .000 733

Concerns and Questions


Did we make the right choice, is this a good fit?


How will this affect enrollment?


YearFreshman class who

would be excluded

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Average

Woodbury is approx. 2/3

transfer, 1/3 freshmen.

Is there a difference between studio and non-studio programs?


How will this change affect my program?


College ProgramWould have been

admitted

Would have

been

denied

Would have

been

denied %

Unknown due

to lack of HS

GPA

Total

Architecture Architecture

Interior Architecture

Overall

Business Accounting

Fashion Marketing

Management

Marketing

Overall

ITS

MCD Animation Arts

Communication

Fashion Design

Filmmaking

Game Art and Design

Graphic Design

Psychology

Overall

(blank)

How would this change affect our student population?

• % Pell recipients among Domestic Freshmen

• Average high school GPA

• average SAT composite

• Demographics:• Asian –

• Black or African American –

• Hispanic –

• Native Hawaiian –

• White –

• Two or more –

• International –

• Unknown –


How would this change affect our student population –HSI status for example?


Gender Ethnicity

Would

have

been

admitted

Would

have

been

denied

Would

have been

denied %

Unknown

due to

lack of HS

GPA

Total

Female

Overall

Asian or Pacific Islander

Black, non-Hispanic

Hispanic

White, non-Hispanic

Male

Overall

Asian or Pacific Islander

Black, non-Hispanic

Hispanic

White, non-Hispanic

Overall

How does Woodbury compare nationally?


Woodbury HERI

Range n Grad? n Grad?

No SAT

600-699

2,688 39.8%

700-799

800-899 6,309 45.2%

900-999 9,583 52.3%

1000-1099 9,150 63.2%

1100-1199 8,707 68.0%

1200-1299 6,772 73.1%

1300+ 5,685 76.5%

Avg

Graduation rates by SAT

Source: http://www.heri.ucla.edu/PDFs/pubs/TFS/Special/Monographs/Degree AttainmentRates

AtAmericanCollegesAndUniversities.pdf

Woodbury HERI

Range n Grad? Range n Grad?

No GPA

2.0-2.5 <C, C-, C 1,212 20%

2.5-2.9 C+ 2,582 33%

3.0-3.4 B- 4,527 40%

B 11,434 48%

3.5-3.9 B+ 12,090 59%

4.0+A- 12,261 68%

A, A+ 12,112 78%

Graduation rates by GPA

http://www.heri.ucla.edu/PDFs/pubs/TFS/Special/Monographs/Degree AttainmentRatesAtAmericanCollegesAndUniversities.pdf

Why not offer more assistance to these students?

• Remedial math courses

• Remedial writing courses

• Writing Center

• Tutors

• Peer mentors

• Counselors


Why not offer more assistance to these students?


HS GPAPopulation

of students

Number

of

students

sampled

Average

number of

years each

student was

at WU

No

enrollment

after

Woodbury?

Reverse

Transfer to

Community

College?

Went to a

different 4

year school

after WU &

CC?

Came back

to WU after a

CC?

< 2.5

2.5 - 2.75

Total

Source: National Student Clearinghouse.


Did we make the right choice,

is this a good fit?

•For the Student

•For the University

Conclusions & Take-aways

1. Focus groups are a social/qualitative methodology

2. We used the methodology to:1. Create useful data displays

2. Discover and address peoples’ issues

3. Effective in our context


how to use focus groups to win friends and influence people

Education

focus groups

traditional focus group

focus group methodology

focus groupled

datadriven admission

sensitive topicscan

school of

hs gpa