PowerPoint Presentation

Non-cognitive Factors and Student SuccessGabriela GarciaJohn BriggsExplore whether using an assessment instrument which measures non-cognitive attributes is a predictor of student success as opposed to other variables.PopulationLarge, urban, public UniversityLarge Under Represented Minority (URM) (> 30%)~40% need remediation inEnglish and/orMathWhat are non-cognitive factors?Assessment of college readinessThe students ability to navigate the demands of the college environmentAbility to persist and graduate

Sommerfeld, A. (2011) Recasting non-cognitive factors in college readiness as what they truly are: Non-academic factors. Journal of College Admissions, Fall, 18-22.Non-cognitive factors is an assessments of college readiness. It is seen as a way to improve the accuracy of selection criteria, casting light on students abilities to navigate the multiple demands of the college environment so that they may have been better able to persist to graduation.

4Student Strength Inventory (SSI)Campus LabsInstrument48 scaled items6 non-cognitive constructsConstructsCronbach Alpha (.81 -.90)Predictive ability

CampusLabs has developed a tool called the Student Strengths Inventory (SSI). The SSI consists of 81 scaled items that form into six non-cognitive factors. The scale is 1 thru 6 (strongly disagree strongly agree).

The constructs have high reliability with Cronbachs alphas ranging from .81 to.90. CampusLabs claims they have construct validity because they correlate to the Student Readiness Inventory. Finally, in a test of predictive validity, the SSI with the High School GPA and/or ACT can predict 1) first-semester GPA, 2) first-year GPA, 3) first and second-year retention, and 4) persistence (Leuwerke & Dervisevic, 2010)

5ConstructsAcademic Self-EfficacyAcademic EngagementEducational CommitmentAcademic EngagementThe value an individual places on academics and attentiveness to school work.Academic Self-EfficacyAn individuals confidence in his or her ability to achieve academically and succeed in college.Academic Engagement/Educational CommitmentAn individuals dedication to college and the value placed upon a college degree.

6ConstructsResiliencyCampus EngagementSocial ComfortResiliencyAn individuals approach to challenging situations and stressful events.Social ComfortAn individuals comfort in social situations and ability to communicate with others.Campus EngagementInvolvement in campus activities and attachment to the college/university.7ConstructsRetention ProbabilityAcademic SuccessIs the two overarching construct that predicts a students ability to persist and thrive. These two constructs are a composite of the preceding 6 constructs.8AdministrationSurveyed First-Time Freshman (FTF) Undergraduate Transfer (UGT)Beginning of 1st Semester (Fall 2014)Solicited through the campus notification systemSelf-selected24% participation rateFTF = 832UGT = 852Administration

URM includes Native American, Black, and Hispanic

Foreign includes students with residency outside the U.S.

First generation includes students who are the first in their family to attend college.

Fall 2014 (General Population):URM = 29%Foreign = 5%Female = 48%1st Generation = 32%

10Administration

Fall 2014 (General Population):Pell Eligible = 5278/26664 = 20% & is used as a proxy for income, but it must be noted that students are identified as pell eligible given a number of factors, not simply income.10% students live on campus, but FTF >30mi are required to live on campusMost of the FTF (832) graduated within the year

11AdministrationAt the end of the surveyScore rangeslow, moderate, or highCampus resourcesClass resources

At the end of the survey recommendations were made regarding student services available. The recommendation were made based upon how well or poorly the student was assessed in each construct. Campus Labs determined which range of scores were low, moderate, or high for a construct based upon prior administrations of this instrument.12Example of Recommendation:Educational CommitmentHigh:Visit the Career Center (http://www.xxxx.edu/careercenter) to identify career options for your college degree.Talk to professors in your department or your academic advisor about undergraduate research or internship opportunities in your major area of interest.The next three slides show an example of the recommendations made to students once they had completed the SSI. This slide shows what the student would see after they completed the SSI and scored high on the Educational Commitment construct.13Example of Recommendation:Educational CommitmentModerateTalk with your academic advisor or visit the Career Center (http://www.xxxx.edu/careercenter) to identify potential careers for individual with a college degree.Speak with your professors or individuals in your field(s) of interest about the value of a college education.This what the student would see if they scored in the moderate range for the Educational Commitment construct.14Example of Recommendation:Educational CommitmentLowTalk with your academic advisor about the wide range of career options for an individual with a college degree or go to the Career Centers website (http://www.xxxx.edu/careercenter) and explore different majors and careers.Speak with your professors or individuals in your field(s) of interest about the value of a college education.And finally if the student scored in the low range for the Educational Commitment construct15Other TreatmentsNoneNo follow-upNo contact from staff, faculty or administratorsMeasures of Student SuccessPersistenceFailureCumulative UnitsCumulative GPAWe used four different measurements of student success. Persistence: If a student who started in Fall 2014 semester was enrolled in the Fall 2015 semester.Failure: If a student received a grade of F or equivalent in one or more courses in the Fall 2014 and Spring 2015 semestersCumulative Units: The number of units earned by the student at the University during the Fall 2014 and Spring 2015 semestersCumulative GPA: The grade point average earned by the student at the University during the Fall 2014 and Spring 2015 semesters

17Bivariate Correlation: Persistence vs. SSI ConstructsFirst-Time FreshmenUndergraduate Transfers

All Students

Bivariate Correlation: Failure vs. SSI ConstructsFirst-Time FreshmenUndergraduate TransfersAll Students

Bivariate Correlation: Cumulative Units vs. SSI ConstructsFirst-Time FreshmenUndergraduate TransfersAll Students

Bivariate Correlation: Cumulative GPA vs. SSI ConstructsFirst-Time FreshmenUndergraduate TransfersAll Students

Demographic/Academic VariablesFirst-time FreshmenUndergraduate Transfer

We said in the beginning of this presentation that we are going to see if non-cognitive factors are better predictors than other variables which we have used in the past. Here are those variables that we have used. We have given them the name Demographic Variables. Please note that some of them, such as High School GPA and Transfer GPA, are not demographic, a majority of them are demographic such as ethnicity and gender. 22RegressionStandardize the independent variablesTwo step regressionSSI Construct(s)SSI Construct(s) & Demographic/Academic VariablesIn order to estimate the predictive ability of the non-cognitive factors and the demographic variables we used a regression analysis.First, we standardized the independent variables in order to make comparisons easierSecond, we did a two-step regression. One with the SSI constructs and the other with the SSI constructs and the demographic variables.

This type of analysis tells us if non-cognitive factors have a predictive capability insofar as student success. It also tells us if this predictive capability is any better than the deographic variables23RegressionDependent Variable: Measure of Student Success

Model 1: Retention Probability (SSI)Model 2: Retention Probability (SSI) and Demographic/Academic VariablesModel 3: SSI ConstructsModel 4: SSI Constructs and Demographic/Academic Variables

As we said before the dependent variable will be the measure of student success: 1) Persistence 2) Failure 3) Cum GPA and 4) Cum Units

There is an overarching construct as well as 6 constructs which determine it. We will have to test each group seperately. This will give us four models for each dependent variable

Model 1: The overarching construct vs. the dependent variableModel 2: Retention probability and demographic variables vs. the dependent variableModel 3: The 7 constructs vs. student successModel 4: The 7 constructs and the demographic variables vs. the dependent variable24Logistic RegressionPersistenceFailureBecause two of the dependent variables are binary, a logistical regression was performed.

25Logistic Regression

These are the number of student that either 1) Failed one or more courses 2) Persisted into Fall 201526Linear RegressionCumulative UnitsCumulative GPA

Because the next two dependent variables are continuous numbers, we performed a linear regression on them.27First-time Freshmen ModelsPersistence

Controlling for other variables an increase of 1 in Campus Engagement increases the likelihood of persisting until Fall 2015 by 1.509 times at the values predicted.28Undergraduate Transfer ModelsPersistence

29First-time Freshmen ModelsFailure in Class

Undergraduate Transfer ModelsFailure in Class

First-time Freshmen ModelsCumulative Units

Undergraduate Transfer ModelsCumulative Units

First-time Freshmen ModelsCumulative GPA

Undergraduate Transfer ModelsCumulative GPA

Other GroupsScience, Technology, Engineering, & Mathematics (STEM) Freshmen StudentsNative Freshmen StudentsFreshmen STEM StudentsCumulative GPA

Freshmen STEM StudentsCumulative Units

Freshmen Native StudentsCumulative GPA

Freshmen Native StudentsCumulative Units

ConclusionNon-cognitive provide little or no additional information in predicting student success for this institutionPredictions can be made with academic/demographic variablesCaveatsTreatment of participants. Recommendation(s) could have made the difference, especially for low performing students> 50% of the students tested were Undergraduate TransfersLarge segment of URM students, the interpretation of questions might be subject to cultural perspectivesCaveatsLarge segment first generation students.

Complete software package was not implemented.Advisors/Faculty did not reach out to studentsCampus services did not reach out to studentsSSI was used as a stand alone toolThank you toScott HeilStuart HoChao Vang