· web view1. a vehicle for focused study and innovation across a wide range of curricular and...

ASSESSMENT OF THE ROANOKE COLLEGE

FACULTY/STAFF LEARNING COMMUNITY PROGRAM

Gregory L. WeissProfessor of Sociology

Arielle Grim-McNallyClass of 2008

August, 2007

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Description of the Roanoke College Faculty/Staff 1

Learning Community Program

Description of the Assessment Project 4

Results 6

Learning Goal #1: Student Participants in the FSLC Program 6Are Actively Involved in This Learning Experience

Learning Goal #2: Faculty and Staff in the FSLC Program 9Develop Increased Insights into the Teaching-Learning Process

Learning Goal #3: Faculty, Staff, and Students in the FSLC 11Program Experience Positive Relationships with Others in the Program and a Heightened Sense of Community

Success as an Innovative Program 15

Retention and Grade Point Average 15

Recommendations for Program Improvement 17

Figure and Tables 22

Figure 1: Roanoke College Faculty/Staff Learning 22Community Program Assessment Plan

Table 1: Attitudes of Faculty/Staff Fellows 24About Learning Community Program

Table 2: Attitudes of Student Associates 26About Learning Community Program

Table 3: Attitudes of Participating Students 27About Learning Community Program

Table 4: Comparison of Students in and Not in 28a LC Course During the Year

DESCRIPTION OF THE ROANOKE COLLEGE FACULTY/STAFF LEARNING COMMUNITY (FSLC) PROGRAM

Interest in a learning community program at Roanoke College germinated in

the late 1990s and early 2000s. In 2002, three members of Roanoke's First-Year

Experience Task Force (Dr. Katherine Hoffman, an English professor who also

directed the college's Center for Teaching and Learning; Dr. Laura O'Toole, chair of

the Department of Sociology; and Dr. William Tenbrunsel, Associate Dean for

Academic Services) participated in a Lilly Conference Summer Institute, "Designing,

Implementing, and Leading Faculty Learning Communities: Enhancing the Teaching

and Learning Culture on Your Campus." Excited about the potential for a learning

community program at Roanoke, these three individuals took leadership

responsibility for designing an innovative program and seeking funds to create it.

The general concept of learning communities fit well with the college's

mission and traditions as a liberal arts institution. The presence of the already-

established teaching center provided a leadership structure for the program, and

the perception on campus that new initiatives were needed to strengthen academic

programs for first-year students provided an important rationale.

The originally conceived design for the learning community program brought

together in a new configuration several elements of learning communities at other

institutions and added some innovative components. The primary aspects of

Roanoke's program were identified as the following:

1. A vehicle for focused study and innovation across a wide range of

curricular and co- curricular topics for up to 12 "Fellows" each year,

2. An initial three-year cycle of communities that would focus on

enhancing the first-

4

year experience at Roanoke, with the focus in subsequent years being

determined by

institutional interests and priorities,

3. Encouragement of both faculty and staff to serve as Fellows for

particular

communities (hence, the name Faculty/Staff Learning Communities),

4. Inclusion of Student Associates who would be selected by each Fellow

to work with

the learning community and be able to provide feedback from a

student perspective

on the focused project,

5. Use of the learning community program to enhance campus

knowledge about the

organizing theme (e.g., first-year student experience in the first three

years and

co-curricular learning beginning in the fourth year), about the teaching

- learning

process, and about learning communities. An early-in-the-year off-

campus retreat,

periodic meetings of Fellows and Student Associates, common

readings, financial

support for conference attendance, and an expectation for sharing

information via

publication and presentation were strategies for achieving this

objective.

5

6. Thorough assessment of individual learning communities and periodic

assessment of

the learning community program.

Dr. Katherine Hoffman directed the FSLC program from its inception through

May, 2006, and Dr. Kristi Hoffman, incoming chair of the Department of Sociology,

has served as the program director for the last year.

The specific goals and objectives of the program have evolved during its first

four years with some aspects moving to greater prominence and other aspects

being de-emphasized. The current, formally stated mission, learning goals, and

learning objectives of the program were written in March, 2007. A copy of these

features is provided in Figure 1.

The program has attracted fairly wide participation among faculty and staff

during its initial four years. In 2003-04, six faculty and six staff led learning

communities; eight faculty and four staff did so in 2004-05; four faculty and four

staff did so in 2005-06; and six faculty and two staff did so in 2006-07 for a total of

20 faculty members and 16 staff members. The topics for the learning

communities reflect the desired level of diversity. Faculty have focused on areas

such as service learning (in a variety of formats and related to a variety of courses),

critical thinking, cooperative research, idea-centered learning, propaganda,

literature on horses, geography, peer-assisted supplemental instruction in calculus,

inquiry focus in general chemistry, animals and society, life callings, writing across

the curriculum, using upper-class student tutors, creative thinking, grants-writing,

peace studies, and experiential learning. Staff members have directed learning

communities involving foci on wilderness programs, elderscholar, library

orientation, computer phobes (overcoming anxiety about using the computer),

6

engaging students with special needs, community standards in residence halls,

residence hall programming, diversity, leadership, global communities, and

storytelling as a means to wellness. In the four years of the program's existence,

more than 500 students have been enrolled in a learning community-related

course, and hundreds more have benefitted from residential and other co-curricular

communities.

7

DESCRIPTION OF THE FSLC ASSESSMENT PROJECT

Both directors of the FSLC program, Dr. Katherine Hoffman and Dr. Kristi

Hoffman, have emphasized the importance of assessment and strategic planning,

and participating faculty and staff have compiled a sterling record of assessment.

Some Fellows entered their learning community experience with more background

in assessment than others, and this has resulted in some variation in the

thoroughness with which learning communities have been assessed. However,

almost every learning community fellow has conducted some assessment, and

many of these efforts are at an extremely high level of thoroughness and

thoughtfulness.

During spring semester, 2007, Dr. Kristi Hoffman asked Dr. Greg Weiss,

Professor of Sociology and formerly Roanoke's Assessment Director, to conduct the

first overall assessment of the FSLC program. In turn, Dr. Weiss asked Arielle Grim-

McNally, a sociology major with excellent research skills and with an interest in

education research, to assist in the project. Because many of the students who

participated in the FSLC program in its inaugural year were scheduled to graduate

in May, 2007, it was determined to expedite the study process so as to have easier

accessibility to these students while they were still on campus.

The decision was made to assess the program using several measures.

Initial foundational personal interviews were conducted with Dr. Kristi Hoffman, Dr.

Laura O'Toole, and Dr. William Tenbrunsel, and an e-mail interview was conducted

with Dr. Katherine Hoffman, who was on sabbatical leave in Sri Lanka.

Identification was made of all faculty and staff Fellows, all Student

Associates, and all participating students (segmented by year of participation), and

electronic addresses were obtained for all individuals. The decision was made not

8

to pursue collection of survey data from faculty and staff no longer at the college,

but information from all Student Associates and participants was pursued. Separate

online surveys were constructed for each of the three groups, the surveys were

pilot-tested, and IRB permission was secured. An advance notice explaining the

survey was sent, and student participants were reminded which of their courses

was in the learning community program. Actual electronic administration was done

through SurveyMonkey, a user-friendly survey research firm with which the college

has an account. The online surveys were sent out in April, and a reminder was sent

a week later to those who had not responded. Responses were received from 27 of

the 29 eligible faculty and staff members (93 percent), from 14 of the 28 Student

Associates for whom electronic addresses were available (50 percent), and from

141 of the 398 participating students for whom electronic addresses were available

(35 percent). Twenty additional students responded privately that they were

insufficiently knowledgeable about the learning community to answer the

questions. Their comments are included in the discussion of results.

The plan was also to conduct two focus groups with student participants and

one with Student Associates. The focus groups with participating students were

conducted in April (a total of 12 participants) and were very helpful. Information

from them is provided in the results section. The focus group for Student

Associates was canceled due to insufficient response. The reasons for the lack of

response were investigated, and that information is also discussed in the results

section.

9

RESULTS

Results of the program assessment are organized in this section according to

the FSLC program's three learning goals and corresponding objectives. The learning

goals and objectives are presented in Figure 1. Responses to the online survey of

FSLC Fellows are presented in Table 1, responses of Student Associates in Table 2,

and responses of participating students in Table 3.

Learning Goal #1: Student Participants in the FSLC Program

Are Actively Involved in This Learning Experience.

A sizable majority of FSLC Fellows, Student Associates, and participating

students perceive their learning community experience to have stimulated student

engagement in beyond-the-typical learning activities. Eighty-five percent of Fellows

(with 48 percent strongly agreeing) and 79 percent of Student Associates (with 43

percent strongly agreeing) believe that the program enhanced student learning.

Three-fourths of participating student respondents (with 30 percent strongly

agreeing) believe the program provided an interesting way for them to get more

involved in their education. While three Fellows and three Student Associates had

mixed feelings about this item, a larger percentage of participating students had

reservations (with 11 percent having mixed feelings, 6 percent disagreeing, 3

percent strongly disagreeing, and 4 percent being unsure). In addition more than

eight in ten of faculty and staff participants perceive the program to have enhanced

student engagement inside and/or outside the classroom (44 percent strongly

agreeing that it had done so, and 37 percent agreeing). The following comments are

selected from those provided by respondents. The type of respondent is designated.

The program stimulated me, encouraged me, and supported me to create what

turned out to be a very rich learning experience for my students and

10

myself. I would not have done this without the support of the program.(Fellow)

[Active engagement was enhanced by] the opportunity for co-curricular experiences

with the students who were also enrolled in an academic class. The enthusiasm the

students brought to the learning experience as a result of choosing a topic they

felt passionately about [was an important benefit]. (Fellow)

[FSLC] offered an easy way to try a new idea or follow a passion! (Fellow)

The learning communities serve as an opportunity for Freshmen to be involved in

in the community outside of Roanoke College. Regular CCLS groups work toward this

end to some degree, but generally speaking, they tend to only encourage sporadic,

one-time service involvement. The learning communities make service and community

involvement an ongoing project. (Student Associate)

I really feel as if my groups touched the community and made a difference.

The audiences all seemed appreciative that we were there to help them. (Student

Associate)

The program made the assignments in class more meaningful. Giving assignments a

real-life context removes the artificiality that regular school projects can have.

Students were truly helping others in the community with their work and this made

the experience very worthwhile. (Student Associate)

It is easy to get passionate about what a professor is passionate about. My professor

was very passionate about what we did in the learning community. (Student)

You get to experience real-life applications of what you are learning and you get

all of the help that you need to be able to grasp the material. (Student)

11

The learning community program makes an individual feel more comfortable and

therefore enhances his or her ability to learn. It is much easier to exhibit a

more personal representation of what one has to offer and increases the ability

to accept criticisms toward that representation. (Student)

I believe the primary advantage of having this program is that students feel more

inclined to participate in the discussion. Asking the Student Assistant her input

as well as her additional comments and responses to the class really helped open the

topic up for discussion. (Student)

Several students commented on specific knowledge and skills acquired in their learning

community. Among these are the following:

Developing a creative writing style really helped me to branch out from the

traditional three-pronged essay, which I really value. (Student)

Being part of a group project for an entire semester required students to be

responsible and dependable to the other members. Also, since our groups worked

with people in the community, there was a good opportunity to get a feeling of

what it is like to work or collaborate with a professional. (Student)

12

I really like how we were able to use Spanish as a community service tool.

(Student)

Great access to otherwise unavailable leadership networking. (Student)

The program taught me how valuable peer editing can be. I used to be afraid of peer editing, but it has brought me friends along with valuable knowledge! (Student)

I believe the experience to work in collaboration with local agencieshas increased my own sense of needing to be involved as well as

providing me with a first-hand experience of how things are done in the worldoutside of academia. (Student)

Included in this goal is the desire that participating students work closely with

their Fellow and with the Student Associate involved in the project. Responses were

generally favorable regarding this item but with a greater range of sentiment. Sixty-

six percent of Fellows strongly agreed (22 percent) or agreed (44 percent) that their

students had worked closely with them, but 15 percent had mixed feelings, 11

percent disagreed, and 7 percent were unsure. Of the responding Student

Associates, 36 percent strongly agreed and 14 percent agreed that students had

worked closely with them, but 29 percent had mixed feelings, 14 percent disagreed,

and 7 percent were unsure. Participating students were asked if the learning

community experience had enabled them to get to know their faculty/staff leader

better than they otherwise would have. Approximately three-fourths think that it did

(35 percent strongly agreeing and 39 percent agreeing). Other responses were

distributed across possible answers, although just 13 percent strongly disagreed or

disagreed that the program had led to a closer relationship.

Especially as a new freshman, the program served to provide a personal commonality between students and the professor. (Student)

13

...allows you to get to know your professor than in a regular class. (Student)

...provided close faculty and student interaction. (Student)

The only thing that really helped was meeting [individually] with the professor. He scheduled mandatory meetings with him to discuss our

papers. Having his input, especially being new to the college and not really

knowing what professors are looking for, was very helpful. (Student)

...helped to keep open the lines of communication between faculty andstudents. (Student)

Learning Goal #2: Faculty and Staff in the FSLC Program Develop

Increased Insights into the Teaching-Learning Process.

Almost every faculty and staff learning community leader (97 percent) strongly

agreed (41 percent) or agreed (56 percent) with the statement that increased

knowledge had been gained about the topic on which the LC was focused, and more

than eight in ten (82 percent) strongly agreed (41 percent) or agreed (41 percent)

that knowledge had been gained about the teaching and learning process. Moreover,

there was very strong belief that the knowledge acquired would affect teaching

strategies, pedagogies, and/or curricular and co-curricular programs. Eighty-nine

percent of faculty/staff respondents perceived that teaching and/or work with

students outside of the classroom would be affected by the LC experience (33

percent strongly agreeing with this and 56 percent agreeing). Changes in individual

courses and the curriculum based on the LC experience were also anticipated by

most of the Fellows (26 percent strongly agreeing that such an effect would occur

and 63 percent agreeing).

The conference that I attended on the First-Year Student Experience was

14

terrific. I very much enjoyed the interaction among faculty, Student Affairs

staff, and Academic Affairs staff. The financial support of the FSLC program

made this possible. (Fellow)

The key benefits were getting support to try a new teaching/learning style

and learning about the efforts of others to create positive learningenvironments. (Fellow)

I had the opportunity to read and study on new ways of teaching information

literacy and library research, and I was encouraged to try these ideas in the

classroom. I found the encouragement and exchange of ideas within the group

to be of great benefit. (Fellow)

One of the most important benefits of the learning community programis sharing ideas and discussing challenges we face with experiential learning. (Fellow)

15

Engaging in discussions/learning about others' projects helped me refine

and/or incorporate new ideas that I had not previously considered...There

were times when I thought this was not going to work, but Kristi provided

me with feedback or offered suggestions for possible resources that were

relevant. (Fellow)

I benefitted from the teaching-related conference that I attended. I learned more about the topic that we explored and the resources that

are available for it. (Fellow)

The sharing of information among participants [forces] one to reflect on the approach taken in the classroom. It helps to break one out of the teaching rut. (Fellow)

I attended an annual meeting of the First-Year Experience Group, and itwas a terrific experience. The mix of faculty, Academic Affairs staff, andStudent Affairs staff was very stimulating. I would likely never have

goneto this conference without the support of the FSLC program. (Fellow)

Roanoke's FSLC program was founded with a desire that the Fellows'

experiences in a LC would be systematically considered and assessed and that this

information would be shared with colleagues at professional meetings and through

publication of scholarly works. Given the time lapse between the end of a LC, the

collection of data, and the preparation and submission of scholarly work, faculty and

staff are achieving this objective remarkably well. To date, there have been ten

presentations at professional meetings and one publication based on the LC

experience, and 11 additional presentations or publications are currently in

preparation. This participation is in addition to several on-campus presentations to

other Roanoke faculty and staff.

16

Learning Goal #3: Faculty, Staff, and Students in the FSLC Program

Experience Positive

Relationships with Others in the Program and a Heightened Sense of

Community.

The FSLC program was created with the goal that it would be an enjoyable

teaching and learning experience that would foster positive relationships among

program faculty, staff, Student Associates, and participating students and that it

would contribute to a heightened sense of community among all of the participants.

Faculty and staff participants rate the quality of their relationships with others in the

program very highly. More than 90 percent of faculty/staff respondents indicate they

had a positive working relationship with other program faculty and staff (67 percent

strongly agreed with this characterization and 26 percent agreed with it). All but one

faculty/staff participant (96 percent) perceived the relationship with the Student

Associate to be positive, and 89 percent believe that the presence of a Student

Associate adds to the program's effectiveness. All but two of the faculty/staff

respondents found a positive working relationship with the participating students (52

percent strongly agreed with this characterization and 41 percent agreed with it).

Faculty and staff also found the periodic get-togethers with others in the program to

be beneficial (41 percent strongly agreeing and 44 percent agreeing).

Our FSLC group of faculty and staff very much enjoyed getting to work with others

with whom we usually do not have an opportunity to work. At almost every single

meeting, we talked about the value of faculty and staff working together in the

program. (Fellow)

Including the staff really proved that the college was invested in us as well as the

17

faculty and students. The experience also gave me more direct student contact that I

had wanted. (Fellow)

I got to know my first-year advisees better than in any other semester. It was very

enjoyable working with them in the learning community. (Fellow)

The program increased the sense of community among faculty, staff, and students.

It provides extra resources to enhance co-curricular life at RC, and thus eliminates

a key barrier - lack of resources. (Fellow)

Interaction of faculty and staff was very beneficial. Several of us cooperated on

our projects and that relationship still exists. (Fellow)

Working with my Student Associate was very beneficial. She gained an inside view

of education, the field in which she plans to work, and my students had her in class

once a week as a mentor. (Fellow)

...an important benefit of the learning community was the inclusion of the

Student Associates. The associate was invaluable to me, but I also enjoyed learning

and seeing through [his/her] eyes in our group interactions. (Fellow)

I really enjoyed the periodic get-togethers with other faculty, staff, and Student

Associates. The faculty and staff frequently lamented that we did not have more opportunities to get together on college-related projects. We really enjoyed

that aspect of it. (Fellow)

I worked with students at [a local service agency] my first year doing FSLC. Being

able to get into the community and out of the classroom was a very beneficial

experience for both the students and myself. I appreciated the opportunity to be

able to work with students helping others in the community - there's a bond that

18

grows when you're helping someone you don't know, especially when you're working

with someone you've just met...I think having a community experience, such as

service, was something that was an important benefit and helped students really

grow when they first arrived at Roanoke. (Fellow)

I think the idea of a Student Associate for each project is an excellent idea.

However, in my individual case, at least, I could have made better use of that

opportunity. That may be my own problem, but to the degree that it is shared,

some really helpful meetings could be held to expand the use of that opportunity.

(Fellow)

Responding Student Associates overwhelmingly indicated that they had a

positive working relationship with their faculty/staff leader, and all but one found the

relationship with participating students to be positive (57% strongly agreeing with

this sentiment and 36 percent agreeing with it). Almost all believe the Student

Associate position adds to the program's effectiveness. Student Associates reported

positive feelings about the periodic get-togethers of program participants. Half

agreed that they were beneficial experiences, and an additional 36 percent strongly

agreed that they were beneficial.

I feel it is important for Freshmen to have links to upperclassmen which makes

having a Student Associate beneficial to the learning community. (Student Associate)

Having the meetings and discussing what is next in each group's project was very beneficial. (Student Associate)

Almost nine in ten (87 percent) participating students reported a positive

working relationship with their faculty/staff leader (45 percent strongly agreeing with

19

this and 42 percent agreeing). However, 7 percent of student participants strongly

disagreed or disagreed. Just over half of students (55 percent) found a positive

working relationship with the Student Associate - the item which elicited the lowest

level of support for a positive relationship. However, about one-fourth of students

(24 percent) were unsure how to characterize this relationship. This finding is

consistent with comments made in focus groups and by most of the students who

apologized for not being able to complete the online survey. Several of these

students were unaware that there was a Student Associate involved in the class or

campus program, and even some of those who were aware indicated that they had

little or no contact with the Student Associate. Given this circumstance, it is perhaps

not surprising that just 15 percent of students strongly agreed that the Student

Associate added to program effectiveness, and 39 percent agreed with this

characterization).

I think the personal relationship developed with the instructor makes it easier

to learn. It is much more interesting to come to class and listen to [lectures].

(Student)

One benefit of the program was if I did not understand what the professor was

teaching directly, I had access to the two Student Associates who could explain

the concept in a different fashion - one I may understand more. (Student)

It helped to build a strong community of freshmen as well as helped to create

many friendships. Three of my VERY best friends are from the program. (Student)

I really got close with my Maroon Corps group and my Maroon Corps leader

...much closer that I would have if we didn't meet every single week. It

20

was a great way to have instant friends and a person to look up to. (Student)

I thought it was incredibly beneficial to have a program that created a very

personal class setting where I felt both involved with my peers and my professor.

(Student)

The most important benefit of the learning community program is that it allows

you to realize aspects about yourself you were not aware of before. Also, you

learn more about your fellow students and form a unique bond that other classes

do not experience. (Student)

21

Ice breakers are automatic when using the learning community program. Coming

into the program, everyone knows that there is at least something that they

have in common, including the professor. It made it very helpful to have something personal to talk about with a professor outside of an

academic setting to get over that barrier of student/professor tension.(Student)

It made for an easier transition into college. It helped me to get to know students and professors. My friends today are people from my group.

(Student)

Having a Student Associate helped to ease students into asking questions in

class. Having an assistant gave a different perspective on how to explain if

it was unclear the first time they were explained. (Student)

Does the FSLC program make a positive contribution to the sense of campus

community? Most respondents think that it does, and faculty and staff are the most

likely to think so. Eighty-six percent of faculty/staff respondents strongly agreed (30

percent) or agreed (56 percent) that their LC experience helped build a sense of

community with each other. However, 11 percent had mixed feelings and 4 percent

(one respondent) did not think that it did. Just under three-fourths of Student

Associates (72 percent) perceived the program to build community among

themselves and the faculty/staff leaders (43 percent strongly agreeing and 29

percent agreeing), although 21 percent had mixed feelings, and 7 percent (one

respondent) did not perceive that. About the same percentage of participating

students perceive a positive contribution to sense of community, although just 29

percent strongly agreed and 46 percent agreed (9 percent had mixed feelings and 11

percent strongly disagreed or disagreed). Thus, the level of support for this item was

high in all three groups.

22

The learning community program increases the sense of community among faculty,

staff, and students. (Fellow)

An important benefit of the learning community program is community. Students

working with Student Associates, faculty, and staff brought opinions and views

from across the spectrum into a single, comprehensible forum: the project. I

especially like the inclusion of a staff member into the classroom. I feel a

majority of students have lacked interaction with staff and it adds a new dimension to students' appreciation of the campus. (Student Associate)

23

An important benefit of the learning community program is interacting with other

faculty and staff and creating a community of students that can share in their development. (Fellow)

[The learning community] increased community involvement for all participants.

(Student Associate)

Our teacher made sure we all knew each other's name, and we shared personal

writings, which really helped to bring the class together. (Student)

I believe the most important benefit of the learning community program was that

we had the opportunity to work with many other students in order to achieve one

main overall goal for the specific class. (Student)

Success as an Innovative Program

Overall, all three groups of respondents conclude that the FSLC program has

been a successful innovation at Roanoke College. For faculty and staff members, 56

percent strongly agreed that the program has been successful, and an additional 30

percent agreed with this characterization. The other four respondents had mixed

feelings. Responding Student Associates also reported strong agreement (64

percent) or agreement (36 percent) that the program has been successful. The

feelings of participating students include more variation, but about three in four (74

percent) strongly agree or agree that the FSLC program has been a successful

innovation (11 percent reported mixed feelings, 9 percent strongly disagreed or

disagreed, and 6 percent were unsure).

I think the FSLC program offers a great experience for everyone

involved. (Fellow)

Comparison of Students in and Not in a LC Course

24

on Retention and Grade Point Average

Ideally, the positive effects of participating in a learning community increase

the likelihood of continuing at Roanoke College and boost motivation for learning

and academic performance. However, because the learning community comprises

just a single experience among the many curricular, co-curricular, and extra-

curricular experiences that students have within an academic year, it is unlikely

that it would have any dramatic effect

on these outcomes. Nevertheless, this assessment compares the retention rates

and grade point averages of students who participated in a LC-related CCLS course

or a LC-related 100-level course with their overall class cohort. These data are

presented in Table 4.

With the exception of the first year of the program, there has been a modest

boost in retention of students who participated in a LC-related course. Retention

for LC participants from first to second year was - .6 percent in the first year, + 3.9

percent in the second year, and + 3.1 percent in the third year. Due to the nature

of enrollment in the LC classes, in very few cases would any self-selection factor be

significant, although the presence of two Honors classes in the second year may

have some influence. Retention from the first to third year shows a similar pattern:

- 3.1 percent for the 2003-04 cohort, but + 5.1 percent for the 2004-05 cohort. The

differences in the retention relationship for the second two cohorts from the first

merits further investigation. It may be related to expected program maturity, to

faculty/staff leaders in the second and third years benefitting from the experiences

of the first-year group, the nature of the courses developed in the second two

years, or possibly other factors.

25

The relationship between LC participation and grade point average has been

inconsistent. For the 2003-04 cohort of students, grade point averages for those

participating in and not participating in a LC class were essentially the same. In the

second year cohort, students participating in a LC earned a grade point average

of .303 higher than non-participants - a dramatic difference. This was the year with

the two honors courses, but it was also the year with the most CCLS courses. In the

third year the effect reverses with LC-related course participants earning a grade

point average that was .136 less than students who had not been in a LC. This

relationship might also be studied in more depth.

26

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT

Based on responses to the close-ended and open-ended questions on the three

online surveys and on comments made in the focus groups, it is clear that the

Faculty/Staff Learning Community program has many strengths. Individual

experiences within the program have varied as would be expected in any academic

program. The following recommendations are grounded in the perceptions shared

with us and are offered for consideration as ways to strengthen the Faculty/Staff

Learning Community program.

The suggestions made for improvement can logically be grouped into five categories:

(1) campus publicity about the FSLC program, (2) class publicity about the learning

community, (3) Student Associates, (4) the group meetings, and (5) overall

organization of the program.

Campus Publicity About the FSLC Program

There has been much communication about the FSLC program to faculty and staff,

but there is the potential to draw more attention to the program. Many faculty and

staff have not availed themselves of the structured opportunities to learn more about

learning communities, and students are largely uninformed about the learning

community program.

Specific possibilities for addressing this issue include the following:

1. Develop a catchy phrase that captures the focus of the learning

community program.

Include this phrase in places where the FSLC program is described.

2. Periodically, focus attention on the FSLC program in places that are

often

27

encountered by faculty, staff, and students. This could include the

college web site,

the Dean's e-newsletter, the Brackety-Ack, and displays in the Colket

Center and the

entranceway to Fintel Library. Emphasize the innovative aspects of

Roanoke's program

and the exciting experiences that many have had in the program.

3. Continue to "spread the word" about the program in routine meetings

attended by faculty

and staff. This could include brief presentations by Fellows in their own

department

meetings. Special focus should be given to encouraging and facilitating

participation by

staff members.

4. Investigate the possibility of adding some designation to FSLC courses

on each semester's

Courses Offered material.

Class Publicity About the FSLC Program

Perhaps the most curious finding of this study is that most students who have been

in a FSLC course or program have never heard the term, learning community, did not

know that they were in a course that was attached to a special program, and had no

knowledge that a Student Associate was working with the Fellow. This circumstance

was emphasized in the focus groups, by several of the online respondents, and by

more than 20 students in the sample who e-mailed Dr. Weiss privately to say that

they could not complete the questionnaire because they did not know about the

28

learning community connection. Students in the focus groups were surprised that

faculty had not talked more about the fact that the course was part of the learning

community program, and they unanimously believed that students would respond

favorably to that information.

Among the ways that this might be addressed are the following:

1. For 100-level courses, ensure that summer advisors are informed about

which courses

have a learning community connection, have relevant descriptions

about the learning

community program and the course, and are enthusiastic about student

participation.

2. Learning community-related courses could be asterisked on the Courses

Offered document

and information about the courses could be published in advance.

3. Instructors of learning community courses should include information

about the FSLC

program and how it relates to the class on the course syllabus and

should talk about the

"specialness" of the course with students.

4. Opportunities could be created for members of different learning

community courses to

meet and to discuss their experiences.

29

5. Instructors should provide some closure about the learning community

program near the

end of each course or project.

Student Associates

The Student Associate aspect of the FSLC program is an important innovation that

offers much potential. Faculty and staff members have incorporated Student

Associates into their classes in different ways and to different degrees and report

largely favorable and very favorable feelings about this experience. Students who

have served as Student Associates and students in learning community-related

courses recognize the potential contribution of the Associates but would like to see

more classes genuinely integrate the Associates into courses.

Among the ways that this might be addressed are the following:

1. Define more clearly the role of the Student Associate.

2. Encourage FSLC Fellows to develop ways to more fully integrate Student

Associates into

courses and projects. Have faculty and staff who have more fully

utilized Associates

describe their experiences in the spring semester to Fellows who will be

part of the

program in the forthcoming year.

3. When appropriate, ensure that Student Associates share some

commonality (e.g., have

the same academic major or interest in the same topic) with the student

members of the

course or project.

30

4. Offer a general orientation to the FSLC program at the end of the

previous spring

semester or at the start of the academic year for all Student Associates.

5. Use additional techniques (e.g., FSLC t-shirts and a Brackety-Ack article)

to increase

identification of the Associates with the program.

6. Have one or more of the periodic FSLC group meetings at which only

the Student

Associates do the presenting.

31

The Group Meetings

Reaction to the group meetings by faculty, staff, and Student Associates has

generally been favorable, and most have expressed positive feelings about the

opportunity to interact with others on campus and to learn more about topics in

higher education. Some Fellows have offered suggestions for ways in which the

meetings could be enhanced.

Among these suggestions are the following:

1. Each year, the Fellows could select one topic (e.g., retention or the level

of high school

preparation for college) in higher education about which they would like

to learn more

as a group.

2. A small number of students who are members of learning community-

related courses

could be invited to address the group of Fellows.

3. Invite Fellows to periodically present particular aspects of their course

or project that have

worked especially well or need to be revised.

Program Organization

Faculty and staff who have participated in the FSLC program have by and large had

very positive experiences and favorably rate the program. Some have made

suggestions for ways to enhance program organization.

1. Place greater emphasis on making the entire campus aware of the

learning community

32

program. Use a variety of techniques to keep the program in general

and specific courses

and projects in the eye of the campus.

2. Continue to emphasize assessment but introduce expectations and

techniques in the spring

or summer prior to the course or project.

3. Encourage faculty and staff with learning community experience to

mentor new Fellows.

Current Fellows might also recruit others to join the course or project for

an individual

session or two with the hope the invitees might become future Fellows.

4. Place greater emphasis on communication with faculty and staff and

attempt to build the

program from bottom up rather than from top down.

5. Continue what has become a successful, innovative program at

Roanoke College.

33

Figure 1: Roanoke College Faculty/Staff Learning Community Program

Assessment Plan

Mission Statement

The Faculty/Staff Learning Community (FSLC) program offers faculty, staff, and students opportunities to work together in a variety of innovative, learning experiences that enhance student engagement in and out of the classroom.

Learning Goals and Objectives

(1) Student participants in the FSLC program are actively involved in this learning experience.

(a) Student participants engage in learning activities beyond typical in- and out-of- the-classroom activities.

(b) Student participants work closely with their faculty/staff fellow and student associate in the learning experience.

(2) Faculty and staff in the FSLC program develop increased insights into the teaching- learning process.

(a) Faculty and staff develop increased expertise in their project topic.

(b) Faculty and staff develop increased expertise in the teaching-learning process.

(c) Faculty and staff develop new teaching strategies, pedagogies, and curricular and co-curricular learning activities based on their experience in the FSLC program.

34

(d) Revisions are made in the college curriculum, in individual courses, and in student affairs based on experiences with the FSLC program.

(e) Faculty and staff share results of their experience at professional meetings and at on-campus symposia.

35

(3) Faculty, staff, and students in the FSLC program experience positive relationships with others in the program and a heightened sense of community.

(a) Faculty and staff experience a positive and enjoyable working relationship with each other, with student associates, and with student participants.

(b) Student associates experience a positive and enjoyable working relationship with their faculty/staff fellow and with their student participants.

(c) Student participants experience a positive and enjoyable working relationship with their faculty/staff fellow and with their student associate.

(d) Faculty, staff, and students interpret the FSLC program as contributing positively to the college's sense of community.

36

TABLE 1: Attitudes of Faculty/Staff FellowsAbout Learning Community Program

SA A MF D SD U About Learning Experiences

1. Students in my LC engaged in learning 48% 37% 11% activities beyond those that are typical (13) (10) (3)

in and/or out of the classroom.

2. My LC enhanced student engagement in 44% 37% 7% 4% 7%

and/or out of the classroom. (12) (10) (2) (4) (2)

About Working With Participating Students

3. Students in my LC worked closely with me 22% 44% 15% 11% 7%on our project. (6) (12) (4) (3) (2)

4. I had a positive experience working with 52% 41% 7%the students in my LC. (14) (11) (2)

About Working With Student Associate

5. Including a student associate in my LC 70% 19% 11%added to its effectiveness. (19) (5) (3)

6. My student associate and I had a positive 52% 44% 4% experience working together. (14) (12) (1)

About Working With Other Faculty and Staff

7. The periodic get-togethers of faculty, 41% 44% 15%staff, and student associates were (11) (12) (4)beneficial experiences.

8. I had a positive experience working with 67% 26% 7%other faculty and staff in the LC program. (18) (7) (2)

37

TABLE 1: Attitudes of Faculty/Staff FellowsAbout Learning Community Program (Continued)

SA A MF D SD U About Sense of Community

9. My LC helped to build a sense of community 33% 56% 7% 4% among participating students and faculty/ (9) (15) (2) (1) staff members.

10. My LC experience helped to build a sense 30% 56% 11% 4%of community among participating faculty (8) (15) (3) (1)and staff.

About Enhanced Knowledge and Pedagogy

11. I developed increased knowledge about the 41% 56% 4%topic on which my LC was based. (11) (15) (1)

12. My participation in a learning community 41% 41% 11% 7%added to my knowledge of the teaching- (11) (11) (3) (2)learning process.

13. I developed one or more new teaching 33% 56% 7% 4%strategies or pedagogies or curricular/ (9) (15) (2) (1)co-curricular learning activities based on my experience in the LC program.

14. My participation in the LC program has led 26% 63% 4% 7%or will lead to some changes in my (7) (17) (1) (2)individual courses or in the curriculum (for faculty) or in my programming work with students (for staff).

About Success as an Innovative Program

15. I consider the LC program to be a successful 56% 30% 15%innovation at Roanoke College. (15) (8) (4)

Number of Professional Publications and PresentationsBased On Learning Community Experience

Publications: 1

38

Presentations at professional meetings: 10Additional publications/presentations

in process: 11

39

TABLE 2: Attitudes of Student AssociatesAbout Learning Community Program

SA A MF D SD U

About Learning Experiences

1. My LC enhanced student engagement in 43% 36% 21%and/or out of the classroom. (6) (5) (3)

About Working With Participating Students

2. Students in my LC worked closely with me 36% 14% 29% 14% 7%on our project. (5) (2) (4) (2)(1)

3. I had a positive experience working with 57% 36% 7%the students in my LC. (8) (5)(1)

About Working With Faculty/Staff Fellow

4. I had a positive experience working with my 86% 7% 7%faculty/staff leader in the LC. (12) (1) (1)

5. The periodic get-togethers of faculty, 36% 50% 7% 7%staff, and student associates were (5) (7) (1)(1)beneficial experiences.

About the Role of the Student Associate

6. Including a student associate in my LC 71% 21% 7%added to its effectiveness. (10) (3) (1)

About Sense of Community

7. My LC experience helped to build a sense 43% 29% 21% 7%of community among participating faculty/ (6) (4) (3) (1)staff and student associates.


40

8. I consider the LC program to be a successful 64% 36%innovation at Roanoke College. (9) (5)

41

TABLE 3: Attitudes of Participating StudentsAbout Learning Community Program

SA A MF D SD U

About Learning Experiences

1. My LC provided me with an interesting 30% 45% 11% 6% 3% 4%to get more involved in my education. (42) (64) (16) (9) (4)(6)

About Working With Faculty/Staff Fellow

2. My LC helped me to get to know my faculty/ 35% 39% 12% 9% 4% 1%staff leader better than I otherwise would (50) (55) (17) (12) (5)(2)have.

3. I had a positive experience working with my 45% 42% 4% 6% 1% 1%faculty/staff leader in the LC. (63) (59) (6) (8) (2)(2)

About Working With Student Associate

4. Including a student associate in my LC 15% 39% 12% 8% 2%24%added to its effectiveness. (21) (54) (17) (11) (3)(34)

5. I had a positive experience working with my 23% 35% 11% 5% 2%24%student associate in the LC. (33) (49) (15) (7) (3)(34)

About Sense of Community

6. My LC helped to build a sense of community 29% 46% 9% 9% 2% 4%among participating students and the faculty (41) (65) (13) (13) (3)(6)staff leader.


42

7. I consider the LC program to be a successful 28% 46% 11% 5% 4% 6%innovation at Roanoke College. (39) (65) (16) (7) (5)(9)

43

Table 4: Comparison of Students In and Not ina LC Course During the Year

Students inStudents in LC-Related Students in

All LC-Related 100-Level Any LC-RelatedStudents CCLS course Course Course

During 2003-04

Percent Returning in 2004 75.0% 60.0% 75.3%74.4%



Grade Point Average at End 2.559 2.221 2.518 2.501of Year

During 2004-05




During 2005-06



· web view1. a vehicle for focused study and innovation across a wide range of curricular and...

Documents