pathways to student success: an integrated, technology ... · the university has developed degree...

1

Viterbo University Pathways Project

Pathways to Student Success: An integrated, technology-enhanced approach

to improving student retention and graduation rates

TABLE OF CONTENTS

COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP)…………………………………………2

Key Strengths

Key Weaknesses and Significant Problems

Key Overall Goals for the Institution

Measurable Objectives for the Institution

Institutionalizing Practices and Improvements

ACTIVITY OBJECTIVES……………………………………………………………………..22

IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY……………………………………………………….…...26

Component One (pg. 28)

Component Two (pg. 31)

Component Three (pg. 35)

KEY PERSONNEL……………………………………….…………………………….……..38

PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN………………………….……………………….………42

EVALUATION PLAN……………………………………….……………….…………....….43

BUDGET……………………………………………………….…………………….………..48

COMPETITIVE PREFERENCE PRIORITY (narrative uploaded separately)

2


COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP)

Institutional Narrative

Viterbo University, a private, non-profit institution, is the only independent university in

western Wisconsin. Founded in 1890 by the Franciscan Sisters of Perpetual Adoration, Viterbo

serves undergraduate students from primarily rural areas in west central Wisconsin, northeast

Iowa and southeastern Minnesota. Undergraduate enrollment has increased during the past 20

years, from 707 in 1989 to 2,012 today. Under the

leadership of Dr. Rick Artman, the university has added

bachelor’s degrees, master’s degrees, and a Doctor of

Nurse Practice degree beginning fall 2013.

The city of La Crosse (population of 51,522) has

a high level of poverty, as indicated by the 49.81% of K–12 students qualifying for free or

reduced meals in 2013–2014 (http://fns.dpi.wi.gov/fns_progstat). Roughly 70% of the counties

within a 100-mile radius of the city are considered rural, as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau.

Rural schools serve 40% of our nation’s students, but only receive 22% of federal education

funding (www.leagueofruralvoters.org/issues/education.html). As a result, underfunded rural

high schools offer fewer opportunities for advanced classes and less access to guidance

counselors. Even honor-roll graduates can be at-risk because they are unaware of deficiencies in

their educational background, and unfamiliar with college expectations and the skills necessary

for success.

Viterbo University’s mission and legacy is to serve the underserved: 44% of all

undergraduate students are first-generation, 40% are Pell recipients, and 27% of students who

filed the FAFSA are classified as low-income. As well, approximately 40% are designated as

Institutional Profile (Fall 2014)

2,812 total headcount

2,012 undergraduate headcount

1,692 FTE undergraduate students

120 full-time faculty

176 full-time admin/staff

73 undergraduate programs

6 graduate programs

http://fns.dpi.wi.gov/fns_progstat

http://www.leagueofruralvoters.org/issues/education.html

3


underprepared because of low student ACT scores and/or high school rank. While Viterbo has

provided access to education for many without opportunities, it has not created adequate support

systems that ensure consistent progress toward graduation. Limited academic advising,

fragmented services, and inefficient intervention strategies often result in insufficient support for

many students. As a result, an average of only 60% of students return for their third year. The

institution’s four-year graduation rate averages 30%, the six-year graduation rate averages

49%—trends that have been stable over the last five years.

Through its current strategic plan, Values and Value 2015–2020, the university has

committed to serve at-risk students through an identified priority of “achieving retention and

student success goals by 2020” and a stated objective to “implement retention strategies proven

by national research and informed by longitudinal research of Viterbo students.” The university

has launched several small pilot programs to improve retention, and initial results are promising.

However, Viterbo lacks the financial and personnel resources required to launch the initiatives

on a larger, systematic scale that significantly impact the retention and graduation rates.

Programs

Viterbo University enjoys an excellent reputation regionally for producing graduates who

enter the workforce fully equipped with skills they need to succeed. The university is accredited

by 10 agencies, including the Higher Learning Commission, and holds memberships in 51

educational organizations. In the past several years, placement studies consistently demonstrate

that 83% of graduates were employed within a year of graduation, and 97% placed overall

(2014). Viterbo offers a broad range of undergraduate programs, with a focus on professional

preparation grounded in a liberal arts tradition. The institution’s portfolio spans two associate

degree programs including a 1+1 agreement with Western Technical College, 71 baccalaureate

4


degree programs, five master’s programs, and one doctoral program in nursing. Viterbo

graduates the largest number of baccalaureate trained nurses of any private university in the

state, and in 2011, constructed a nursing facility to support continued growth and excellence in

this area of distinction. The core curriculum “LIVE: Liberal-arts, Integrated, Values-based

Education” is five years old, and was designed with input by 70% of the full-time faculty, and

was unanimously approved by the Faculty Council—reflecting participatory and shared

governance processes characteristic of the Viterbo faculty. The key features of the core, which is

integrated across all majors, are small, interdisciplinary seminars required each year and a strong

assessment foundation for continuous improvement. In 2015–2016, the LIVE curriculum will be

reviewed as part of an ongoing program review process. Complementing academics are many

co-curricular activities, including the Honors Program, athletics, intercollegiate recreational

sports, global studies, fine arts, undergraduate internships, and service learning research.

Faculty Characteristics

Students from rural areas are frequently drawn to Viterbo’s small class sizes, low

student-to-faculty ratio (12:1), and the individual attention provided by faculty and staff. The

120 full-time faculty members at Viterbo are teacher scholars who have embraced a student-

centered model. In addition to a full-time teaching load of 24 credit hours per year, all faculty

serve as academic advisors and participate in university governance and service. For example,

faculty willingly mentor summer undergraduate research projects funded through benefactor

gifts, with over 70% of faculty engaged in this initiative in the last three years. Thirty-four

percent of the faculty have been hired within the last seven years, mainly due to retirements of

long-serving faculty.

5


Planning Processes and Inclusive Leadership

Every Viterbo employee is a member of one of three assemblies that meet monthly,

including subcommittees and task forces created to address specific issues and challenges.

Through the assemblies, concerns and suggestions are brought to the president’s cabinet, and

minutes from all meetings are shared with the campus community. This model of shared

governance creates a strong sense of inclusiveness and collegiality, since community members

work collaboratively to discuss pressing university problems and implement action plans. This

planning process prioritized retention and improved graduation rates as critical university issues.

A retention study was first completed in 2009 and reviewed by diverse groups. The same year, a

small Student Success Program (SSP) was created to help a cohort of underprepared students

succeed in their first semester, and in 2011, a limited home-grown early alert system was

launched. In 2014, the goal of raising improved retention and graduation rates was identified as

Viterbo’s Quality Improvement Project for 2015–2017, as part of the Higher Learning

Commission Open Pathways accreditation process.

Institutional Strengths/Weaknesses and Significant Problems

The table below provides a summary of Viterbo’s strengths, weaknesses, and significant

problems in the areas of academic programs, institutional management, and fiscal stability.

Strengths in Academics and Student Support

Teaching

Excellence The 2011 Student Satisfaction Inventory shows faculty received student satisfaction scores

above national comparison groups on “The instruction in my major field is excellent,” “The

quality of instruction I receive in most of my classes is excellent,” “Faculty care about me as

an individual,” and “Faculty provide timely feedback about student progress in a course.”

Promotion and tenure decisions are based on teaching, service, and scholarship.

The deep commitment of Viterbo faculty to serving underserved students is clear by the

length of tenure, willingness to earn a lower salary, and maintaining high accessibility for

students.

High

Placement

Rates

The 2014 placement study showed that 83% of graduates were employed within six months

of graduation.

The overall placement rate for the class of 2014, including employment outside of graduate

study field, was 97%.

For nursing, the university’s largest major, the placement rate in the field was 95%.

6


Improved

General

Education

Program

The new core curriculum includes small, discussion-based seminars that promote

interdisciplinary teaching and learning.

The program includes an integrated service learning component for juniors.

Faculty members from every department teach the seminars, bringing unique perspectives.

Diverse

Delivery

Models

The university has developed degree completion programs for non-traditional learners that

focus on accessibility for working adults and account for over 20% of the undergraduate

enrollment.

Courses are offered in the evenings, and on weekends, off-site or online.

Liberal Arts

Focus Founded and sponsored by the Franciscan Sisters of Perpetual Adoration, Viterbo is a

Catholic, Franciscan university grounded in the liberal arts tradition. Through the mission of

“The Viterbo University community prepares students for faithful service and ethical

leadership,” faculty and staff strive to produce graduates who enter the workforce fully

equipped with skills they need to succeed.

Weaknesses in Academics and Student Support

Graduation

Rates are

Too Low

Viterbo’s graduation rates are below our peer groups and national norms:

o The six-year average graduation rate is 49%.

o The four-year average graduation rate is 30%.

Overall

Retention

Rates are

Low

Retention rates are too low and are well below our peer groups:

o The average third semester retention rate is 71%.

o The average fifth semester retention rate is 60%.

Uncertainty about major/career path is the top reason students leave Viterbo, suggesting

academic advising and career services are not meeting needs.

The vast majority of students did not seek support before making the decision to not return.

No

Infrastruct

ure for

Early Alert

Response

In 2013, Viterbo implemented Starfish early alert system after a home grown system,

launched in 2011, failed to meet our needs.

Faculty submit alerts in week 5 and week 10.

Over 1,300 alerts are generated, and a committee attempts to contact students with the highest

number of alerts—but very few students are reached.

Faculty advisors have a low level of engagement with following up on alerts with their

advisees.

Data from the alerts are not used to improve student support services or course instruction.

Advising is

Limited The majority of students only meet with their faculty advisor once a semester for registration;

they do not seek out their advisor for academic support on a regular basis.

Student surveys identify a desire to have more assistance from a faculty advisor on career

planning.

Students report difficulty in meeting with their advisors on short notice.

Academic advising is still a paper-based system – not accessible to others who may wish to

help students who are struggling.

Little training on advising occurs, beyond initial orientation when hired.

There are no centralized reports generated on advising or student meetings.

Limited

Academic

Support

There is only one full-time academic support employee focused on retention.

Student information (advising notes, etc.) is not available to academic support offices.

No structure exists for centralized services or case tracking.

There is limited career services programming available in the freshman and sophomore year.

Few academic support or career planning resources are available online when students are not

on campus, or when key offices are closed.

Too Few

Academic

Integration

Strategies

in the First

Two Years

to Promote

There is little or no training for faculty to integrate high impact practices into courses or

programs to promote retention.

Most high-impact practices currently offered are focused on juniors and seniors (service

learning, undergraduate research, internships, etc.).

“Gateway courses” in the freshmen and sophomore years (where less than 80% of students

get the required grade to continue to the next course) are least likely to have high impact

7


Retention

and Success

practices integrated. 59% of students who do not succeed in 2 or more gateway courses do

not persist beyond the 3rd semester.

No resources or coordinated support strategies exist to promote high impact practices.

Access to

Information

is Limited

Advisors do not have information to identify which advisees are at risk of attrition.

Generating retention studies is very cumbersome and done manually, so information is

received too late to adequately intervene in a helpful way.

Departments do not have access to retention information at the program level.

The institution experiences significant delays in getting overall retention data to make

changes.

Strengths in Institutional Management

Commitment

to Access

Viterbo provides access to high-quality education for many first-generation students with

high financial need. There is a commitment to keeping cost as low as possible.

Tuition is in the lowest quartile of all private non-profit colleges in Wisconsin, Minnesota,

Illinois, and Iowa, which are primary recruiting areas for Viterbo.

Viterbo has the second-lowest tuition among private colleges in Wisconsin.

While the comprehensive cost of attending and living on campus is $31,730, the average cost

per student is $8,635 after scholarships and federal aid (including work study and loans).

Since 2008, 46 endowed scholarships and 67 annual scholarships have been added.

Strong

Leadership The president is a dynamic leader who has served successfully since 2006.

The Vice President for Academic Affairs has over 13 years of experience at Viterbo,

returning recently to serve as Vice President for Academic Affairs after a significant

leadership role in the UW colleges. She has previous experience in retention and high impact

practices.

Weaknesses in Institutional Management

Enrollment

Pathway

During the past decade, enrollment increased from 2,206 undergraduate and graduate students

in 2004 to a high in 2009 of 3,287, before declining to 2,812 currently.

Undergraduate enrollment has been decreasing for the last four years and is expected to

remain at lower levels for the 2015–2016 academic year—matching demographic trends in

the region for the next four years. This demonstrates the importance of retention activities.

Decision-

Making

and

Planning is

Plagued by

Incomplete

and

Inaccessible

Data

Limited or improper coding systems limit access to retention information. For example, a

code for transfer status was added only in 2006, so data on transfer students is limited.

Existence of multiple home-grown spreadsheets without the ability to integrate data, and

limited understanding of best practices. Higher chance of error in manual spreadsheets.

Data extraction and analysis is a manual process, requiring enormous time investments.

Many offices lack access to data and/or reports, and cannot query data sets.

Time-sensitive data is labor intensive and takes priority over much-needed longitudinal

analyses.

Only one dedicated institutional researcher, who also coordinates assessment, is not able to

meet demands with these labor intensive, inefficient reporting/analysis systems.

Under-

resourced

Student

Support

Services

Insufficient staffing to serve the needs of at-risk student population compared to other

schools.

Online career and planning resources are not available for students who commute, who work

many hours, or who need services during the summer.

Students and faculty complain about the lack of online resources for student support

services—online tools that do exist are fragmented across many sites, and online log-ins are

unique for different services (student record, library, Moodle, course evaluation system).

Limited technology is available to provide the infrastructure needed for coordinated student

services.

Training on best practices in retention or the use of technology has been very limited.

Manual

and

Inefficient

Processes

The technology infrastructure is not sufficient to automate and standardize many processes.

Many offices function are in silos, and inefficiencies exist due to the lack of strong work flow

systems.

Lack of understanding/training about data reporting and storage.

8


Problem Analysis

Status of Graduation Rates: Recent data reported from the US Department of Education

indicates that Viterbo’s current six-year graduation rate of 49% falls short of the 65% graduation

rate for private not-for-profit degree-granting institutions (Kena, 2015). The Austen Group study

revealed, in comparison to peer institutions (same region, enrollment size, and Carnegie

classification), graduation rates for Viterbo’s five most recent entering cohorts have consistently

fallen short in every category by eight or more percent. Four-year graduation rates are also low:

Viterbo’s average rate is 30%, which has remained consistent for the last five years. The

additional financial burden placed on students who enroll beyond four years compounds the low

six-year rate. Over the last five years, over one-third of students in Viterbo’s most recent full-

time, first-time cohorts are eligible for Federal Pell Grants. As well, the new legislation (Public

Strengths in Fiscal Stability

Fiscal

Stability The ten-year budget forecasts and conservative budgeting models resulted in balanced

budgets for the last 38 years.

Measures instituted to strengthen financial stability include:

o Contingency equivalent to approximately 2% of budgeted revenues

o Physical plant improvement reserve is approx. 1% of net replacement value of fixed assets

Improved

Campus

Facilities

In the last ten years, Viterbo has invested a total of $46,679,930 in buildings and facilities:

o A state-of-the art nursing center, a new student housing complex, and a performing arts

center

o Significant building renovations have taken place in the School of Business and residence

halls

Weaknesses in Fiscal Stability

Tuition-

Dependent

Institution

83% of core revenue in FY2013 was derived from tuition and fees.

Lost revenue from high attrition:

o With only 72% of the freshmen cohort retained on average, the university loses $962,268

in each of the next three years that these students would otherwise have been in

attendance.

o It costs approximately $1,864 to recruit a new student to replace a student lost to attrition.

Low

Endowment Compared to a peer group of Wisconsin Association of Colleges and Universities (WAICU),

the endowment per total full-time equivalency (FTE) is low:

o WAICU peer group average endowment per total FTE (2013): $15,690

o Viterbo endowment per total FTE (2013): $12,103

Problem Statement

Overall

Problem

Graduation and retention rates are too low.

Problem

Statement

Fragmented student support in advising and career planning, limited integration and

engagement efforts, and limited access to data and information in a timely manner leads to

significant student attrition and low graduation rates.

9


Law 112–74) reduces students’ ability to receive Pell Grants from 18 to 12 semesters, creating an

urgent need to address low graduation rates.

Retention Issues: As a result of low graduation rates, retention rates are also a concern.

In fact, Viterbo’s freshmen leave the university at higher rates than the state, regional and

national averages for freshmen at four-year colleges. The average third-semester retention rate

of 72% is lower than the Council of Independent Colleges and Universities' national median of

75% for the 2012 cohort. According to Aud et al., (2011), “Retention rates for first-time students

at private, nonprofit 4-year institutions followed a similar pattern: the overall retention rate was

81 percent, ranging from 64 percent at the least selective institutions to 97 percent at the most

selective.”

Retention and Grad Rates Using the Most Recent Averages

each cohort group returns for the junior year. The top reasons

students give for leaving Viterbo are shown in the adjacent table

(data from exit interviews 2011–2014). In each of these

circumstances, the vast majority of students did not seek support

from any campus office before making the decision not to

return, and they did not discuss the decision with their faculty

advisor. This demonstrates a lack of integration to the campus, an important indicator of

retention described in the literature (Allen, 2008), that is often achieved through student-faculty

0

20

40

60

80

100

3rd Sem

Ret

5th Sem

Ret

7th Sem

Ret

Retention Rates

0

20

40

60

80

100

4 Yr.

Grad

5 Yr.

Grad

6 Yr.

Grad

Graduation Rates

Top reasons given for

leaving Viterbo

Change of or

uncertainty about major

Financial issues

Personal/health reasons

Fit at Viterbo

Moving closer to

home/homesick

Through Viterbo’s in-depth

retention analysis, the fifth

semester retention rate has

been identified as a critical

issue: on average, only 60% of

10


interactions and high-impact practices (HIPs), due to their positive correlation to student learning

and retention. However, in the 2014 National Survey of Student Engagement, only 10% of first-

year students at Viterbo reported participation in two or more HIPs which is below our

comparison group of Catholic colleges and universities.

Impact of Low Retention Rates: In addition to the negative repercussions for students

who fail to persist, low retention rates also have a severe financial impact on the university. In

fact, the institution loses close to $1M per year in revenue from the average freshmen not

retained to the third semester. Significant costs are also incurred for new student recruitment,

averaging $1,864 per student lost to attrition.

Risk Factors for Failure to Persist: The analyses of 2009–2014 by the Viterbo

University Taskforce on Retention identified four student entry attributes as risk factors for

higher levels of attrition: low income, low ACT composite, low high school rank, and

undeclared major. The definition and the retention rate for each area is shown in the table below,

with corresponding figures demonstrating that the cumulative effect impact these risk factors.

For students with no risk factors, the 5th semester retention rate is 71%. However, the majority

(54%) of students passes at least one risk factor, with a 5th semester retention rate of 48%. The

percent of the cohort with two or more risk factors is 18%.

Analysis of Targeted Rick Factors

Top Four Risk Factors with Definitions

Factor Definition 5th sem.

retention rate

% in

category

Low-income Family income of $35,000 or below as reported on

FAFSA, which is Adjusted Gross Income (AGI). 60% 24%

Low academic

preparation (ACT)

ACT composite score of 20 and below 52% 28%

Low academic

preparation (HS rank)

Students in the bottom 50th percentile of high school

rank 36% 20%

Undeclared major No major defined on application or in admission

process 45% 10%

11


Undeclared students: Only 45% of students who enter the university with an undeclared

major are retained to the junior year. Low retention among undeclared majors is consistent with

higher education research, which indicates unclear career goals are linked to an increased risk of

attrition, and suggests student commitment to educational

and career goals is one of the strongest factors associated

with persistence to degree completion (Gohn, 2001;

Wyckoff, 1999). Undeclared students take a variety of

liberal arts courses until they choose a major, but many

begin to question why they are in college when they fail to

see connections between their courses and their future world

of work. In an effort to help these students explore

career opportunities, the university offers a one-credit

career development course with demonstrated success in helping students choose a major. But it

serves only a small number of students, and the career exploration opportunities within the

course are limited. In addition, although career planning is a priority for today’s students

(Walker, 2002), the university’s Career Services office is not integrated into the advising

process, and faculty are not trained to provide assistance to students in evaluating career interests

or developing career plans. The Career Services staff is smaller than comparable WAICU

schools (two full-time employees) and cannot independently meet all the career counseling needs

of our students, thus limiting the services that can be provided. According to the director,

Viterbo students not only need more targeted services in their first and second years, but career

counseling and tools for students and faculty need to be integrated into the advising process and

available online.

5th Semester Retention Rate

(Fall 2010 cohort)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Low Risk High Risk

Entire 0 1–4 2–4

cohort Risk Facotrs

0 risk 1 2 3 4 risk

factors factors

12


Research also indicates students are more likely to persist to graduation if supported by

advisors who engage them in educational planning and decision-making linked to career

preparation (Cuseo, 2010). Little emphasis has been placed on career planning in the advising

process at Viterbo. This is particularly important for students interested in nursing who struggle

academically in the first year and are at risk of not meeting the minimum criteria for admission

to the professional phase. Without improvements in both advising and academic support, the

majority of undeclared students and students who “become” undeclared because they are not

admitted to the professional phase of a program (i.e. nursing) will continue to leave. These

students comprise almost one-third of entering students and represent a large part of the retention

problem.

Academically Underprepared Students: University retention studies demonstrate a

direct correlation between low retention and low high-school percentile rank, as shown in the 5th

semester retention table on the previous page. The data also reflect findings of an extensive

national retention study that compared high school performance with ACT scores and retention,

and identified a moderate correlation (Lotkowski, Robbins, & Noeth, 2004). As well, the report

identifies three factors with a significant correlation to retention: 1) academic performance,

2) academic self-confidence, and 3) academic goals. This suggests focusing retention efforts on

students with low high school performance is most effective when both non-academic and

academic support systems are included.

Evidence from a Viterbo pilot study suggests the strategies proposed in this grant will

positively impact retention rates of underprepared students. The Student Success Program at

Viterbo was implemented in fall 2009 for students with a composite ACT below 18 and a low

high school GPA. As a condition of admission, the approximately 20 students in this program

13


each year were required to meet with an advisor frequently during the first semester, take a

limited number of credits, participate in engagement activities and peer mentoring, and receive

tutoring—an intrusive advising model. This program has proven to be successful in retaining

87% of students from the first to second semesters. However, the program only operates in the

first semester for 20 students. The subsequent retention study found the retention rate for this

group dropped rapidly in subsequent semesters when services were not provided. In fact, only

38% have been retained to the fifth semester. In summary, Viterbo lacks the resources to

implement the program on a larger scale or to continue the intrusive advising model beyond the

first semester.

Low-income Students: Low-income students not only experience significant economic

barriers to enrolling in college (Engberg & Allen, 2011) but have only a 6% likelihood of

graduating within five years (Duffy, 2007). Twenty-four percent of Viterbo’s first-time, first-

year students are from low-income households, defined as a family income below $35,000 AGI

on the FASFA. This low income definition of 150% poverty is from the Health and Human

Services poverty guidelines for a family of four and is congruent with the literature on low

income (e.g. Engberg & Allen, 2011). Viterbo offers no programs geared toward low income

students that have proven to be successful at other institutions (e.g., financial literacy, financial

aid nudges).

Too Few Freshmen Succeed in Gateway Courses: As is the case at most colleges,

entry-level, or “gateway” courses have highest enrollments and the lowest success rates. With

approximately half of Viterbo’s freshmen majoring in nursing and the sciences, introductory

courses in biology, chemistry, and math are often a major barrier to success. An in-depth study

in 2009–2013 identified on average, 49% of Viterbo students who withdrew or did not earn a

14


grade of C or higher in a gateway course were not retained to the sophomore year. As well,

fifty-nine percent of those who did not pass this threshold in two or more gateway courses were

also not retained. The Director of Financial Aid reports a growing number of students not

meeting satisfactory academic progress guidelines for the continuation of their financial aid,

which usually results in withdrawal from the university. In addition, new legislation designating

federal financial aid can only be used to repeat a course students have passed with a D or better

will cause more withdrawals, regardless of institutional policy or program requirements. The

absence of interactive approaches and students’ lack of knowledge of academic support

resources were also identified as factors limiting student success in gateway courses. In fact, the

Director of Student Success and the Retention Leadership Group report that insufficient progress

in gateway courses in the first two years is the most significant contributor to students not

graduating in four years. Students who struggle either drop or repeat courses causing them to get

a year behind. Advisors report that very few students facing difficulties in gateway courses seek

assistance from them. In addition, early alerts from gateway courses do not receive unique

attention in interventions, given the high volume of alerts and the lack of personnel dedicated to

addressing them.

Fragmented Student Support Systems

Advising is Not Meeting Student Needs: A primary factor affecting retention is the

quality of interaction a student has with a supportive person on campus (Habley, 2004;

Lotkowski, Robbins, & Noeth, 2004). Academic advising is one such opportunity to develop a

formal student–mentor relationship. Although many Viterbo faculty members strive to make

themselves available to students, despite their heavy teaching loads, the university fails to fully

take advantage of this opportunity for increased interaction. Results from Viterbo’s most recent

15


Academic Advising Perception Inventory indicate few students meet with their advisor for more

than registration. When asked to complete the sentence “I wish my advisor would…,” the most

common responses were: “meet more often,” “keep in touch with me more,” and “check how

I’m doing.”

A growing number of students are failing within the existing advising system because

both enrollments and faculty advising loads have increased over time so there is no systematic

way to identify problems. Without a central location where students can seek help at the time an

issue arises, they cannot quickly access advising support, or they lack basic information about

where to seek help. Advising records are still kept on paper in faculty offices, making it difficult

for other staff to assist the student when the advisor is not immediately available, causing student

frustration. In addition, while faculty are committed to students, they receive little advisor

training and are not familiar with best practices for either advising at-risk students or improving

student retention. Faculty also have limited knowledge of support processes outside of

academics, including financial aid or career services. In addition, in some majors, such as

nursing, students take few classes in their major until their sophomore or junior year and

therefore lack an ongoing connection with the program or their advisor. The result is

inconsistent advising that stifles attempts to implement advising methods supported by retention

research.

A major factor in increasing student retention is creating advising systems that take into

account both the academic and developmental needs of students (Clark, 1989). In such a model,

advisors initiate discussions that help students make academic decisions within the context of

understanding themselves and their life and career goals. Students are encouraged to participate

in a variety of co-curricular activities and support services to achieve their goals. At Viterbo,

16


advising is primarily a registration process whereby faculty discuss courses that meet graduation

requirements. This is reflected in the lowest ranked items on the Academic Advising Perception

Inventory: 1) “My advisor has made me aware of other sources on campus as they relate to my

specific needs (e.g., counseling, career services, tutoring),” 2) “My advisor helps me clarify

relationships between my academic preparation and the world of work,” and 3) “My advisor

engages me in realistic self-assessment and encourages me to develop decision-making skills.”

Under the current system, advising outside registration is mostly reactive and assumes students

will self-identify their support needs and seek assistance. However, many Viterbo students have

not established the behavioral patterns or self-efficacy needed to find help, so advising often

occurs when a student is already in danger of dropping out. In response to student needs for

drop-in advising help, a Student Help Office opened in the spring of 2013, but for limited hours

and has little functionality to access advising files or training.

Early Alert System and Early Intervention Are Limited: In 2011, Viterbo launched a

home-grown early alert system that allowed all employees to submit concerns about

students. This system had very low response rates from faculty. In 2013, Viterbo implemented

Starfish Early Alert software and successfully increased the participation of faculty in the early

alert process to over 90%. In 2014, over 1,300 alerts were generated per semester; however,

Viterbo lacks the infrastructure to reach out to students. Close to three-quarters of alerts are for

students in their first two years. A committee of five individuals from different offices review

the alerts in several meetings per semester. However, due to the overwhelming number of alerts

generated, only students with a high number of alerts, or who are on academic probation and at

risk of being dismissed are contacted by the Director of Student Success. As a result, less than

10% of students with alerts are contacted by the Director or committee members, and it can take

17


several weeks for the communication to occur. In addition, alerts are not linked to the paper-

based advising files, and intervention plans and follow ups are tracked separately in spreadsheets

and via email. The faculty retention survey demonstrated that faculty do not feel equipped to

assist their advisees who are struggling in courses outside their discipline. In general, we have

experienced low engagement with faculty advisors in helping students with early alerts. A

limited number of faculty may reach out to their advisees via email; however, very few have

meetings to discuss strategies or refer the students to additional academic services. The lack of a

centralized infrastructure to handle early alerts negatively impacts our retention efforts. In

addition, the lack of an integrated software system to track intervention plans is inefficient and

pulls the academic support staff away from working with students and can duplicate efforts.

Decision-Making is Plagued by Incomplete and Inaccessible Data and Inefficiencies:

Another factor that impedes the university’s ability to improve retention is a lack of access to

data and the existence of multiple home-grown spreadsheets. Currently, data extraction and

analysis requires enormous time investments from personnel in the Registrar’s office, IT, and

Institutional Research. For example, it took six weeks of work for one programmer to

manipulate data, write queries, and generate the extensive data sets for the recent retention study.

Even though the retention study was a priority, the analyst had to reach across institutional

offices for missing data. When data is needed to inform decisions about planning and budgeting,

it is often unavailable, or in a form difficult to interpret, because of outdated information

management systems that require manual transfer of data across non-integrated systems.

Accessing data often requires computer programmer intervention to generate reports and conduct

transactions, which regularly create problems and cause delays. The creation of data snapshots

at a time point is a manual and time-intensive process that affects the ongoing longitudinal

18


analysis of data needed to pinpoint and address student success issues. The university has taken

steps to improve the tracking of student data to inform retention initiatives, with priorities that

include consolidating data and simplifying reporting; however, budget constraints, available

technology, and staffing limitations have hindered these efforts.

Conclusion

The high attrition rates indicate Viterbo is failing to meet many of its students’ basic

academic and support needs. Because the university is committed to higher education access for

underserved students, these needs are often substantial. Without better tracking systems to

identify needs and strategies to meet these needs, Viterbo’s commitment to access will continue

to fall short of enabling underserved students to obtain a college degree. Moreover, a continued

focus on access without addressing retention would be a disservice to students who must repay

student loans without an academic credential to increase their earning power.

Analysis Process by Major Constituencies: The analysis for this Comprehensive

Development Plan began when a presidential retention task force began meeting in 2009 to

investigate retention and graduation rates. In 2010, data was available for the community to

review, and in 2011 several pilot programs were initiated to address retention. All assembly

members reviewed the data in 2012 and provided feedback on the retention issue. Since 2013, a

retention leadership group has met to review data and priorities. This proposed Pathways

Project objectives were reviewed by the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees

(2015), the faculty (2015), Retention Leadership Group (2015) and the Cabinet/Deans’

Leadership group (2015), and confirmed to be the highest priority for this proposal. Additional

planning data was collected via institutional research studies, task force findings, feedback from

local employers, and student opinions collected through numerous surveys and forums. Specific

19


studies, surveys, and meetings that supported planning are detailed in the following table:

Group or Data Source Date

Faculty, Staff, and Administrative Assemblies 2012

Viterbo Retention Study 2009–2015

Key Indicators Tool Kit by the Austen Group 2009–2014

Academic Advising Perception Inventory of Viterbo Students 2009, 2011, 2013

National Survey of Student Engagement Spring 2010, Spring 2014

Viterbo University Image Survey 2008–2011, 2013–14

Admitted Student Survey 2008–2014

Social work, education and nursing alumni and employer surveys 2007–2014

Advisory board meetings for School of Nursing, Business and Education 2007–2014

Post-college Placement Report, Class of 2011–2014 2011–2014

Student Success Program Retention Study Fall 2011–Fall 2014

Faculty survey on retention Spring 2013

Student survey on academic support services Spring 2013

Key Goals and Objectives Related to the Activity

The university developed the following key goals to address the weaknesses and problems:

CDP Five-Year Goals and Measurable Objectives (2015–2020)

Goal 1: Establish the Center for Student Success where unified, data-driven interventions improve

student success, retention, and graduation rates.

Measurable Objectives Specific Tasks and Methods Tangible Results by

2020

1.1 Increase four-year

graduation rates for

first-time full-time

freshmen from 30% to

36%

1.2 Increase the overall

fifth-semester retention

from 60% to 70%

1.3 Increase fifth-

semester retention of at-

risk students

(undeclared freshmen,

low income, low HS

preparation) from 48%

to 58%

Establish the Center for Student Success for

centralized, coordinated support, and immediate help—

including virtual assistance.

Fully utilize an effective integrated early alert system

for retention.

Develop and implement intrusive support services for

at-risk students.

Offer peer mentoring program for at-risk students

based on best practices.

Offer career planning retreats and workshops for

freshmen and sophomores.

Offer panels for first generation students based on

proven practices.

Offer financial literacy workshops and initiate a nudge

system for financial aid steps based on best practices.

Launch improved online assistance for all students

(resources, portal, career assessment, and virtual help).

6% increase in 4 year

graduate

10% increase in the

fifth-semester retention

rate

10% increase in fifth-

semester retention rate

of at-risk students

Goal 2: Implement a technology enhanced advising model to support retention and improve productivity

Measurable Objectives Specific Tasks and Methods Tangible Results

2.1 Increase the percent

of freshmen and

sophomores who are

supported by the

Viterbo developmental

advising model to 80%

Train all faculty and academic staff in a deliberate

cohort model in the development of advising model.

Provide ongoing best practices training.

Implement imaging system to enhance advising and

record keeping.

90% of advisors will

utilize the new

advising model and

technology

20


2.2 Increase the

percent of freshmen and

transfer students who

have a graduation plan

that has been reviewed

by their Pathways

advisor and program by

the end of the first year

to 90%

Initiate developmental advising procedures by

Pathways advisors for all freshmen and sophomores

and students on probation.

Use Student Portal to target communications based on

risk criteria for students.

All first-year students will generate 4-year graduation

plans with a Pathways advisor.

Integrate career-planning resources into 4-year plan

development.

40% of all freshmen

will participate in a

career planning

workshop or retreat

80% of freshmen and

sophomores will

complete multiple

“key advising check

points” in the new

Viterbo advising

model

90% of freshmen will

have a four year

graduation plan

mapped

Goal 3: Implement program–level retention plans and academic integration strategies to increase

student engagement, success, retention and graduation rates

Measurable Objectives Specific Tasks and Methods Tangible Results


of programs with action

plans for improved

retention and academic

integration to 90%

3.2 Increase the

percent of freshmen and

sophomore engaged in

new academic

integration strategies to

promote retention and

success to 60%

Train all faculty on academic integration strategies and

implement practices.

Prioritize expansion of high impact practices at the

institution level to freshmen and sophomores with

proven success through mini grant proposal.

Expand high-impact practices in student life through a

mini-grant program for clubs, activities, resident life,

veteran’s affairs, and campus ministry.

Develop program-specific plans for academic

integration on program specific retention and success

data, and risk factors for students.

School level dashboards will be produced for student

success measures.

Use Student Portal to target at-risk populations for

engagement in high impact practices.

Develop program specific 5-year retention goals and

post results yearly in the online assessment teaching

system (TracDat).

90% of programs will

implement and

measure the impact of

a high impact practice

20 new high impact

practices aimed at

gateway freshmen and

sophomores courses

40% of at-risk

freshmen and

sophomores will

participate in a high

impact practice

90% of faculty and

student support staff

are trained on high

impact engagement

strategies

Institutionalizing Practices and Improvements

The likelihood of successful project institutionalization is increased by involving those

who will implement the project in the planning process and empowering them to influence the

outcomes, resulting in a sense of ownership that mobilizes interest, consensus, and support

among key stakeholders (Adelman & Taylor, 2003). A retention leadership group is currently

meeting, and many offices have been involved in small pilot activities and plan to improve

retention. The highly-inclusive planning process for this project has resulted in widespread

21


support for the activity among faculty and administrators. Training and resources have been

included in the budget to provide the support needed for successful implementation and

continuation of the initiatives after the grant. Faculty participation is expected and will be part of

the evaluation processes for reappointment, tenure, and promotion. These steps will ensure the

leadership, knowledge, and accountability needed to maintain the activities firmly in place.

Another effective institutionalization strategy is to assume substantial project costs

progressively during the grant period. The university will incrementally assume salary and

benefits so it is paying 75% of personnel costs by 2020, a contribution of more than $375,000

during the grant period. Annual licensing

costs for the imaging software purchased

through the grant will also be assumed by

the university incrementally, with the

university paying 75% by year five. These

costs will be incorporated into the IT

budget, primarily through the increase in

technology fees generated and through the

additional students retained. The institution

will also provide workspace and computers for new employees and create the infrastructure

necessary for the Center for Student Success. The Center for Student Success will be adjacent to

the Career Services office and the Academic Resource Center to promote collaboration making

the area a one-stop model for student success and promoting collaboration.

Ongoing costs for personnel and technology will be supported by revenue from increases

in retention and enrollment realized through this project. When fully operationalized, the model

Cost of institutionalizing ongoing expenses for full

integration of grant activities in 2020

Item Approx.

Cost Funding Source

Advisor – At Risk $ 60,000 Acad. Affairs

Advisor - Career $ 60,000 Acad. Affairs

Faculty/ Acad. Integration

Coordinator $ 90,000 Acad. Affairs

Systems Integration

Specialist $ 85,000

IT

Software $ 56,500 IT

Career Programming –

Freshman/Sophomore

$ 10,000 Acad. Affairs

Faculty Stipends $ 8,600 Acad. Affairs

Career Service Tools $ 5,000 IT

Peer Mentor Program $ 8,000 Acad. Affairs

Mini-grants $ 20,000 Acad. Affairs

SSC Events $ 5,000 Acad. Affairs

Total Yearly Cost $408,100

22


predicts at least 140 additional students enrolled in 2020–2021 from the retention to generate

$1,513,680 per year (at an average net revenue from tuition, room/board, fees of $10,812 per

student/year). This will easily offset the cost of operationalizing the activities as shown in the

above table, at a cost of $408,100 in 2020–2021. Title III objectives were approved by the

Cabinet in May 2015, and will be reviewed regularly by senior administrators at Title III Task

Force and cabinet meetings. The Task Force, in addition to guiding project implementation, will

be charged with ensuring the funds receive ongoing budgeting support (see Project

Management). President Artman places a high priority on the Title III project and has widely

communicated his belief these initiatives are critical to Viterbo’s future self-sufficiency and the

university’s Strategic Plan. He will ensure the Title III initiatives become permanently

embedded in the university’s infrastructure, identity and budget.

Summary of Funding Source for Key Positions

Position (% time dedicated) Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Post

Viterbo Funding for the Following Positions

VPAA/Activity Coordinator (15%) 100%

VU

100%

VU

100%

VU

100%

VU

100%

VU

100%

VU

Director of Retention/Activity Director

(90%)

100%

VU

100%

VU

100%

VU

100%

VU

100%

VU

100%

VU

Assistant Director of Retention (90%) 100%

VU

100%

VU

100%

VU

100%

VU

100%

VU

100%

VU

Title III Funding for the Following Positions

Two Student Advisors (100%)

At risk Focus (1)

Career Focus (1)

100%

T3

100%

T3

75% T3

/25% VU

50% T3/

50% VU

25% T3

/70% VU

100%

VU

Project Assistant (100%) 100%

T3

100%

T3

100%

T3

100%

T3

100%

T3 N/A

Faculty/Academic Integration

Coordinator (50%) N/A

100%

T3

75% T3

/25% VU

50% T3/

50% VU

25% T3/

70% VU

100%

VU

Systems Integration Specialist

(100%)

100%

T3

100%

T3

75% T3

/25% VU

50% T3/

50% VU

25% T3/

70% VU

100%

VU

ACTIVITY OBJECTIVES

The Pathways Project is a single activity with three inter-related components to improve

retention and graduation rates. First, a Center for Student Success (CSS) will be launched to

provide centralized and immediate support services enhanced through technology. Centralized

23


Student Support Services will provide one-stop help for students and additional programming

and resources. Secondly, a coordinated, technology enhanced advising model will be launched,

with additional targeted intrusive mentoring and coordinated retention plans for at-risk students

who are at an elevated risk of attrition. Third, all faculty and staff will receive ongoing training

on advising, retention, and academic integration strategies with practices known to be high-

impact. In addition, the programs will design retention plans to impact students in their majors.

Finally, the new infrastructure for implementing analytics and technology-based approaches to

retention and improved graduation rates will impact all initiatives.

With a Title III budget of $1,999,814, Pathways to Student Success will impact all

Viterbo students by enhancing services, increasing fifth-semester retention by 10%, and

increasing the four-year graduation rate by 6%. This activity responds to the Competitive

Preference Priority (CPP) identified in the “Strengthening Institutions Program” as supporting

strategies for which there is moderate evidence of effectiveness. Descriptions and

implementation plans are outlined in the separate CPP upload.

The following table delineates how achieving the activity objectives addresses the defined

problems and contributes to the goals of the Comprehensive Development Plan.

Competitive Preference Priorities Studies

Studies Results

1. Closing the Social Class Achievement Gap: A

Difference-Education Intervention Improves First

Generation Students’ Academic Performance and

All Students’ College Transition by Stephens,

Hamedani and Destin (2014)

Difference education intervention using college

seniors real-life stories about how their diverse

backgrounds can shape what they experience in

college. The intervention eliminated the social-

class achievement gap – increasing use of

resources and improving GPA

2. Style Over Substance in Interventions for At-Risk

Students: The Impact of Intrusiveness by Molina,

Anthony, and Abelman (2000)

Intrusive interventions resulted in higher

cumulative GPAs and retention rates. Students at

the highest risk of academic dismissal were the

most responsive.

Relationship of Objectives to Problems Addressed

Objective Performance Indicators

(baseline data on page 46-47)

Yearly

Benchmarks

Problem(s)

Addressed

24


Goal 1: Establish the Center for Student Success where unified, data-driven interventions improve

student success, retention, and graduation rates.

1.1 Increase four-year

graduation rates for

first-time full-time

freshmen from 30% to

36%

Yr 4: 33%

Yr 5: 36%

1.1a Increase % of seniors on track to

graduate in four years

Yr 5: 6% Graduation and

retention rates are

too low

1.1b Increase % of juniors on track to


Yr 4: 6%

Yr 5: 8%

Graduation and

retention rates are

too low

1.1c Increase % of sophomores on track to


Yr 3: 6%

Yr 4: 8%

Yr 5: 10%

Graduation and

retention rates are

too low

1.2 Increase the

overall fifth-semester

retention from 60% to

70%

Yr 2: 62%

Yr 3: 64%

Yr 4: 67%

Yr 5: 70%

1.2a Increase the percent of intervention

strategies implemented for freshman and

sophomore students with early alert

warnings in two or more classes

Yr 2: 40%

Yr 3: 60%

Yr 4–5: 75%

Fifth-semester

retention of all

students is below

state and CIC

average

1.2b Increase the number of virtual services

launched that are targeted at student success

and retention (virtual student help, virtual

advising help, student portal for one stop

help, virtual tutoring, online career

explorations)

Yr 1: 1 service

Yr 2: 3 services

Yr 3: 5 services

Yr 4–5: 6 services

Student support

services are not

meeting students’

needs

1.2c Increase the career programming

opportunities targeted to freshmen and

sophomores (workshops, retreats, courses,

etc.)

Yr 1: 2 activities

Yr 2: 4 activities

Yr 3: 6 activities

Yr 4: 8 activities

Yr 5:10 activities

Student support

services are not

meeting students’

needs

1.3 Increase fifth-

semester retention of at-

risk students

(undeclared freshmen,

low income, low HS

preparation) from 48%

to 58%

Yr 2: 50%

Yr 3: 52%

Yr 4: 54%

Yr 5: 58%

1.3a Increase the percentage of members

of at-risk student population that work

with a Pathways advisor trained in

supporting at-risk students in a variety of

areas to 90%

Yr 2: 45%

Yr 3–5: 90%

Fifth-semester

retention of high-

need students is

too low

1.3b Increase the number of at-risk

students who participate in programming

targeted to at-risk freshmen and

sophomores (first generation panel,

financial literacy training, college survival

skills, etc)

Yr 1: 10%

Yr 2: 25%

Yr 3–5: 60%

Fifth-semester

retention of high-

need students is

too low

1.3c Increase the percent of at-risk students

who participate in peer mentoring

programming in the freshmen year

Yr 1: 10%

Yr 2: 25%

Yr 3–5: 50%

Fragmented

support systems

do not provide the

services needed to

at-risk students

Goal 2: Develop faculty and staff to effectively utilize technology in support of student success, retention,

and graduation


of freshmen and

sophomores who are

supported by the VU

developmental advising

model to 80%

2.1a 95% of full time advisors will

complete training on developmental

advising model as part of a coordinated

cohort model

Yr 1: 25%

Yr 2: 60%

Yr 3–5: 95%

Advising systems

are inefficient,

lacking

information and

paper based

25


Pathways to Student Success addresses the key problem of low retention and graduation

rates through integrated, complementary components. The impact of these initiatives will be

measured annually. While the objectives are very ambitious, the project will be transformative in

Yr 1: 20%

Yr 2: 40%

Yr 3: 60%

Yr 4–5: 80%

2.1b 90% of full time advisors and student

support staff will complete training on

software to support advising as part of a

coordinated cohort model

Yr 1: 20%

Yr 2: 50%

Yr 3–5: 90%

Four year

graduation rate is

too low

2.1c Increase the percentage of new

students who have completed “key

advising checkpoints” in the first two years

at Viterbo in the new advising system to

80%

Yr 2: 20%

Yr 3: 40%

Yr 4: 60%

Yr 5: 80%

Advising is not

meeting student

needs


of freshmen and transfer

students who have a

graduation plan that has

been reviewed by their

Pathways advisor and

program by the end of

the first year to 90%

Yr 1: 25%

Yr 2: 50%

Yr 3–5: 90%

2.2a Increase the percentage of second

semester freshmen who have developed a

four year degree plan as part of the new

VU developmental advising model to 90%

Yr 1: 25%

Yr 2: 50%

Yr 3–5: 90%

Four year

graduation rate is

too low

2.2b Increase the percentage of first

semester transfer students who have a

graduation plan developed as part of the

new VU developmental advising model to

90%

Yr 1: 25%

Yr 2: 50%

Yr 3–5: 90%

Four year

graduation rate is

too lo

2.2c Increase the percentage of freshmen

who seek career planning resources as part

of their four-year graduation plan as part of

the new VU developmental advising model

to 40%

Yr 2: 20%

Yr 3: 30%

Yr 4–5: 40%

Fifth semester

retention rate is

too low

Goal 3: Implement program–level retention plans and academic integration strategies to increase

student engagement, success, retention and graduation rates


of programs with action

plans for improved

retention and academic

integration to 90%

Yr 2: 20%

Yr 3: 50%

Yr 4–5: 90%

3.1a Increase the percent of full-time

faculty and student support staff who

complete training in retention and

academic integration from 0 to 90%

Yr 1: 25%

Yr 2: 50%

Yr 3–5: 90%

Limited training

on academic

integration

strategies

3.1b Increase in the percent of programs

with five-year retention plans on file to

90%

Yr 2: 10%

Yr 3: 50%

Yr 4–5: 90%

No program level

retention

strategies

3.1c Increase the percent of schools with

retention dashboards through analytics

integrated in the year-end reports from 0 to

100%

Yr 3: 20%

Yr 4: 50%

Yr 5: 100%

Programs do not

have access to

current data on

retention


of freshmen and

sophomore engaged in

new academic

integration strategies to

promote retention and

success to 60%

Yr 2: 10%

Yr 3: 30%

Yr 4: 50%

Yr 5: 60%

3.2a Increase the number of new high

impact practices aimed at freshmen and

sophomores launched to 25

Yr 2: 6

Yr 3: 15

Yr 4: 20

Yr 5: 25

Too few academic

integration

strategies in the

first two years

3.2b Increase in the percent of schools with

five-year academic integration plans for

freshmen and sophomores on file to 100%

Yr 2: 10%

Yr 3: 50%

Yr 4–5: 100%

Too few academic

integration

strategies in the

first two years

26


multiple ways: 1) Viterbo systems become more efficient, 2) institutional financial stability is

enhanced; 3) enhanced support systems are available to at-risk students, and 4) the students who

are able to persist and graduate will have better lives.

IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY

The research referenced in the Competitive Preference Priority section aligns with the

findings of the Comprehensive Development Plan and informs the Activity Objectives and the

Implementation Strategy. Viterbo University’s proposed Pathways to Student Success project is

built upon a strong institutional commitment to access and is designed to strengthen student

persistence and completion, while increasing institutional efficiencies. Pathways to Student

Success is a formal, comprehensive retention program with three integrated components that

promote student success. The key to the success of this program is the ability to launch these

initiatives in an integrated manner. For example, the impact of early alert interventions will only

be fully realized if the advising model is modified to focus on more than registration. In

addition, without retention data and analysis capabilities at the department level, faculty “buy-in”

will be more limited, compared to having greater ownership of the problems and solutions. The

Pathways to Student Success will be supported by data-management software and an analytics

approach to retention, which will integrate data and provide faculty and administrators ready

access to data. This use of technology and integrated data sets will increase productivity and

efficiency, and support ongoing, real-time assessment of efforts. The project will be led by the

Vice President for Academic Affairs, with the day to day management provided by the Director

of Retention and cooperating offices. Together the team will empower students as they progress

on the path through college to graduation and career placement.

All three components described below depend on the use of technologies to improve

27


data-driven interventions and programming. To support the overall goals of the Pathways

Project with ongoing assessment of its impact and effectiveness, the university’s existing

Ellucian information management system will be augmented with Ellucian’s Reporting and

Operating Analytics (ROA) module. This module will facilitate evidence-based decision-

making by breaking down current information silos and by streamlining the flow of information

from coding to reporting. Access to integrated and graphical reports will optimize the use of

current databases, and real-time dashboards will ensure decision-makers have ready access to

information for the adjustments necessary to support student success. ROA will streamline the

longitudinal assessment of key performance indicators throughout the institution. It will also

simplify reporting and facilitate interactive queries and analysis, which is not currently possible

with a one-person office and insufficient technology. The document imaging solution will

complement Ellucian’s ROA; integrating with existing data infrastructure to automate student

service processes by supporting file sharing, storage, and access for key, authorized personnel.

The Systems Integration Specialist will have previous experience with data sets and reporting, to

assist the launch of this initiative. The specialist will ensure the timely use of dashboards to

track the effectiveness of the Pathways to Student Success Program interventions. This position

will continue after the duration of the grant to ensure continued use of data to strengthen student

success and retention. Institutional capacity for report generation will increase significantly with

every office having access to real-time reporting, positively impacting productivity with the

addition of just one staff. With this technology in place, the university will be able to efficiently

and cost-effectively increase student persistence and completion rates based on the outcomes of

all three components. In addition to the software and implementation costs, new servers will be

needed to store the data from the various systems and allow the Ellucian ROA system to generate

28


the dashboards.

All activities and resources will be designed or implemented intentionally to be

accessible to all students. Our accessibility commitment and nondiscrimination policy will be

provided to participants and in promotional materials. Please see attached plan for more details.

Component One: Establishment of the Center for Student Success (CSS) where unified,

targeted, data-driven interventions will promote student success

Currently, the majority of academic student support offices are located on the third floor

of the main administrative building on campus, and each office operates as a separate entity with

limited collaboration. Creating a single, integrated space will provide a welcoming place where

students know they will get support. Currently, students may have to wait a week or two to get

an appointment with a particular academic support staff member. The current wait time causes

students frustration, and they often conclude their problem is not solvable. In addition, a

significant number of our students work high numbers of hours outside the university (common

with first generation students) or commute over 30 miles to campus. The CSS will provide

virtual services and extended hours to assist these students. Students will have a single location

where they receive immediate assistance, and staff will schedule a follow-up appointment for

more in-depth support. The university will assume all necessary costs for the physical creation

of the CSS. Additional services are outlined in the following table.

Proposed services of the Center for Student Success

Drop in advising and academic support help (9–7 Monday–Thursday, 9–4 Friday);

Virtual advising and academic support help through a secure chat feature

Academic and career planning with electronic tools

Four year graduation plan development for all students and stored electronically

Mentoring program for at-risk students

Follow-up services in: counseling services, financial aid, academic resource center, health service, career

planning, global education, and volunteer/internship office

Coordinate and advertise workshops and informal sessions on career planning, academic planning, success

strategies, and financial aid

Retreats and formal career planning programming aimed at freshmen and sophomores (with Career

Services)

29


Campus and community engagement activities through peer leaders program

Panels organized for first generation college students on transition to college

Implement “nudges” related to financial aid deadlines and on-campus resources for targeted populations

based on risk factors

Monitoring and ongoing intervention through electronic early alert system

Communication with the identified relevant individuals for early alert situations (may include faculty,

advisors, coaches, etc., depending on the situation following FERPA guidelines)

Development of resources linked to the student portal for 24/7 access to information

Expand available resources and student services

As described in the chart above, a significant number of new services will be provided by

the Center for Student Success. A few of these services are explained below.

First generation student panel: As described in detail in the uploaded Competitive

Preference Priority, panels will be held by senior college students on how their diverse

backgrounds can shape their experience in college. The study by Stephens et al. (2014)

demonstrated that this intervention lowered the social-class achievement gap by increasing the

tendency of first-generation students to seek out college resources and improve GPAs, but open

to all first-year students. Implementation will closely follow the design of this study, with minor

changes based on our environment. Details can be found in the uploaded CPP. This will be

organized by the academic advisors with a focus on at-risk students.

Enhanced career planning resources for freshmen and sophomores: Currently very

few freshmen and sophomore students take advantage of career planning services at Viterbo.

Less than 30 students enroll in career planning courses, and very few visit the career services

office in their first two years. Student perception is that Career Services is for the placement of

students into jobs or for resume work. The academic advisor focused on career counseling will

work collaboratively with the Director of Career Services to expand the number of workshops,

majors fairs, job shadowing, and retreats offered for freshmen and sophomores. In addition,

online tools will be added to promote access to students when the office is closed.

30


Peer mentoring program: The Center for Student Success will offer a peer mentoring

program for at-risk students. This mentoring program will build upon our current pilot program,

in which two peer mentors work with 20 at-risk students in the Student Success Program

(outlined on page 12). The Pathways Project will expand this program to provide up to eight

new peer mentors per year. At-risk students will be offered the opportunity to be part of a peer

mentoring in their freshmen year to promote social and academic enrichment and development.

The mentors will help students become better acquainted with each other and the university

through team building exercises and attendance at athletic or fine arts events. Peer mentors will

also lead regular sessions that discuss study strategies, transition challenges, and focus on

building relationships. This process will increase the likelihood of student success and

persistence.

Implement Virtual Resources: To enable the seamless integration and delivery of the

information to students, a new student portal will be added, Ellucian Portal/ILP. The systems

will greatly streamline the data infrastructure and allow key personnel to maximize time spent

with students and minimize time devoted to accessing and sharing information.

Ellucian Student Portal functionality will allow for ease of access to support structures

and university success and communication tools. The portal will also allow for personalized

student support based on student codes, and the ability to “push” key information to students on

the login page. A “single pane of glass” can give users access to their courses in the LMS, email,

focused announcements, access to their university account and degree planning, and success

resources. For faculty and staff, it increases confidence that students will see content from the

various university systems. Additionally, there will have the added benefit the tool can be used

for departmental communication with students. Student and faculty surveys (2013) document

31


frustration with the difficulty of finding information through the various sites/resources on

campus. This system will provide a one-stop coordinated location for student services.

Development for Effective Technology Implementation: A Systems Integration

Specialist will be hired through the grant (and institutionalized after the grant) to provide

leadership and ongoing development for all employees on the technology-enhanced systems

utilized to improve productivity and student success. Trainings, informal sessions, and one-on-

one assistance on how to use the technology will be offered. Workshops and training will be

added to the faculty development yearly calendar, with one external speaker with expertise in

retention and academic integration featured per year. The appropriate Title III and IT staff will

receive advanced training on how to use/implement the new imaging software, the Ellucian

Analytics Module, and Ellucian Student Portal as part of the service agreement included when

the software modules are purchased (part of the implementation costs). An intensive Ellucian

best practices workshop will be offered in Year 4 to promote productivity, systems

improvements, and efficiencies.

Component Two: Development of technology enhanced coordinated advising model and

intrusive advising for high-risk students

Technology-enhanced developmental advising model: All students at Viterbo are

assigned a faculty advisor that assists students in selecting courses and discussing career options

related to their major. Through this Pathways Project, students will also be assigned a Pathways

advisor will work collaboratively with the faculty advisor. Advising for all students will be

enhanced by increasing the number of advising checkpoints and integrating the development of

an electronic four year plan by the end of the freshmen year. This will also promote integration

of career planning resources in the development of the four-year plan if the career/major goals is

32


uncertain. Developmental advising is a term for academic advising approached from a student

development theory, in which the advisor encourages students to develop, evaluate and assume

responsibility for their educational and career goals. It also encourages students to identify and

recognize their strengths and weaknesses, and take steps to develop the former and address the

later. It differs significantly from the more common prescriptive approach to advising currently

used at Viterbo.

King and Kerr (2005) recommend

a dual advising model, with trained

academic support advisors/mentors and

faculty advisors working together. In this

project, the priority of the faculty advisors

will be to discuss with their advisees issues related to their majors and concerns in courses—

particularly within the discipline. Generally, as the student progresses through their program, the

need for faculty advising increases while the need for academic success advising decreases. The

enhanced academic advising and mentoring for high need students complement each other

(Ableman & Molina, 2001; Jeschke, Johnson, & Williamson, 2001). Mercy College (AAC&U,

2011), a private liberal arts college serving a large portion of first-generation students, found a

20% higher retention rate from the freshman to sophomore year for students who participate in a

similar optional program (PACT), compared to students who did not. Workshops, retreats,

computer-based career and strengths assessment tools, and informal learning sessions will also

be offered by the center staff, in cooperation with other offices.

Electronic advising files accessible by both the faculty advisor and he Pathways advisor

will be critical to the success of this initiative. Advising files will be pre-populated with

0

25

50

75

100

1 2 3 4

VU developmental advising: A collaborative

effort between pathways and faculty advisors

An

tici

pat

ed %

of

Inte

ract

ion

Years

33


Automated Personalized Pathway for Student Success

“personalized pathways for academic success”

based on the major and risk factors outlined as

earlier (see page 19 for a description). These plans

will provide all advisors with a list of strategies for

the advisee that can be the basis of conversations

with the students about their success. Whereas

advisees are currently required to meet with their advisor only once per semester, the new system

incorporates multiple “key advising checkpoints” with a Pathways advisor at specific times

during a student’s first three semesters. Pathways advisors will discuss any early alerts

generated at checkpoint meetings, and contact the student if an alert requires intervention. While

faculty will be trained on the developmental advising model, the majority of the visits in the first

three semesters will be handled by the Pathways advisor. The imaging system will allow notes,

documents, advising files, four year plans, and other pertinent information to be shared by the

Pathways advisor, the faculty advisor and anyone else who has a need to have access, based on

FERPA guidelines. This tool integrates with Ellucian to automate student service processes by

supporting file sharing, storage, and access for key, authorized personnel and will significantly

impact efficiency for offices that currently use paper files.

Semester Checkpoint and Purpose of Pathways Advising Meeting

Sem. 1 Prior to classes

Week 2–3

Week 7–8

Week 11–12

Welcome: Overview advising process, discuss short- and long-term goals.

Academic Integration: Discuss personalized plan and possible support services. Encourage

participation in integration activities and any early alerts.

Mid-Semester: Discuss mid-term grades, any early alerts, improvement strategies, revisit

plan and encourage participation in integration activities.

End-of-Semester: Discuss major or possible majors if undeclared, short-term and long-term

goals, and career possibilities. Assist with registration.

Sem. 2 Week 2–3

Week 7–8

Welcome Back: Review and encourage student’s use of academic services and involvement

in integration activities.

Mid-Semester: Discuss mid-term grades, any early alerts, short- and long-term goals,

internship, undergraduate research and career opportunities. Develop four-year degree plan.

High Risk Medium risk

– entry

attributes

Lo

w

Hig

h

En

try

att

rib

ute

s

(AC

T,

fin

anci

al n

eed

,

HS

ran

k,

un

dec

lare

d)

Medium

risk -

integration

Low risk

High Low

Planned integration (fine arts

ensembles, sports, live in

dorms, sports teams, etc.)

34


Week 11–12 End-of-Semester: Discuss internship and career opportunities and complete four-year degree

plan. Assist with registration for following semester.

Sem. 3 Week 2–3

Week 7–8

Week 11–12

Welcome Back: Review four-year degree plan. Review and encourage student’s use of

academic services and involvement in integration activities.

Mid-Semester: Discuss mid-term grades, any early alerts, short- and long-term goals,

internship and career opportunities.

End-of-Semester: Review four-year degree plan and make adjustments as necessary. Assist

with registration for following semester.

The Assistant Director of Retention will lead the implementation of Component Two

focused on intrusive advising. This position at VU is currently a 2/3 time assignment (teaching

1/3) to coordinate the paper based advising system. The institution commits to transitioning this

position to at least 90% associated with the goals of the grant. In addition to the extra hours per

week gained through this new priority, productivity will increase by shifting processes away

from paper to an electronic advising system. Currently, paper files are generated for each

student, and a tracking system for registration and advising is created independently from our

Students Records Management system.

Intrusive Advising for High-Risk Students: Viterbo’s retention studies of the last four

years suggest low academic preparation (low ACT composition or low HS rank—two distinct

criteria), high financial need (low family income—below $35,000), or an undeclared major

status are indicators students are at a high-risk of attrition from Viterbo in the first two years.

For these reasons, students with these attributes will be referred to as “high-risk” for the purpose

of this grant. These risk factors appear to have an “additive” effect. Students with two or more

risk factors (70–80 students of a typical entering cohort), have a 48% fifth-semester retention

rate compared to 71% for students with no risk factors (see page 11). The objective (1.3) is to

raise the retention rate for this targeted group and mediate the effect of multiple risk factors. A

plan will be developed individually, based on the risk factors, entry survey results, and additional

factors that are determined. High-risk students will have more frequent meetings with CSS staff,

35


following the successful intrusive advising models in the literature. In addition, students who

receive two or more mid-term grade D/F warnings, students placed on academic probation,

students who are not admitted into the professional phase of a major (“becoming” undeclared as

a result), and students who receive a significant number of early alert warnings by faculty and

staff will be considered high-risk and added to the intrusive advising program.

Preliminary data from a pilot project and best practices in the literature suggest these

efforts will be successful. Results of this pilot study are discussed beginning on page 12. This

intrusive mentoring program is designed to complement, not replace our traditional faculty

advising model. Implementation details are part of the CPP, closely following documented

successful practices.

Component Three: Engaging faculty and student support staff in retention plans and

student success strategies at the program level

Component three will engage academic departments and student support offices to

develop retention plans to improve student integration and engagement in their interest areas.

The chart below shows how all units will be trained on the various components of the grant. The

student support staff will be trained first. Subsequently, two “units” from the academic areas

will be trained at a time in a cohort model. This model has proven successful at Viterbo in the

past, through working with smaller groups and refining the materials for each cohort.

Description of Steps in the Cohort Training and Implementation Model

Group Trained Jan

2016

May

2016

Aug.

2016

Jan.

2017

May

2017

Aug.

2017

Jan.

2018

May

2018

Aug.

2018

Jan.

2019

May

2019

Student Support Staff A B C D E F G

CONHHB

undeclared A B C D E F G

COESM / COBAL A B C D E F G

COAL New Hires A B C D E F G

36


A Study student success data, retention data, student characteristics (for Colleges – data for their

specific programs) (Training led by Director of Retention)

B Training on Pathways Advising Model and Student Success Strategies (Training led by Asst. Director

of Retention and Director of Career Services).

C Training on new technology – analytics and documentation of advising and student records (Training

led by Systems Integration Specialist)

D Training on high impact practices for student success (led by Faculty/Academic Integration Coord)

E Retention plans for specific programs developed (led by Dean/Director/Chair)

F Document progress, discuss next steps and refinements (led by Dean/Director/Chair)

G Discuss and launch refined programs/activities/strategies (led by Dean/Director/chair)

Ongoing Progress towards goals will be built into year-end reports, a minimum of one department meeting per

year focused on retention, a minimum of one training per year during inservice

Colleges

CONHHB = Nursing, social sciences, and dietetics; COESM = Education, Natural Sciences,

Mathematics; COBAL = Business and leadership; COAL= Fine arts and humanities, New Hires =

individuals hired after their cohort was trained

Development of Program-Specific Retention Plans: All academic programs and student

support areas will complete training on retention, high-risk students, and best practices for

retention. Through the lens and experiences of their offices or academic programs, specific

retention data will be reviewed using the Ellucian ROA dashboards. The programs will design a

retention plan through 2020 and create yearly reports on activities and progress through TracDat,

our assessment software tool. While training will be provided by the grant staff and external

experts; Deans and Directors will lead the development of the plans.

Academic Integration Activities: Research suggests that high levels of student

engagement in academic activities increases both student performance and retention (Lundberg

& Schreinder, 2004, Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991). Higher levels of student-faculty interactions

also correlate to the number of students who are more satisfied with their college experience

(Woodside et al., 1999). Multiple practices have been designated as “high impact” by the higher

education community due to their positive associations with student learning and retention

(NSSE, 2007). AAC&U identified 10 promising “high impact” activities, including first year

seminars, common intellectual experiences, learning communities, service learning, writing-

intensive courses, collaborative assignments/projects, undergraduate research, student abroad

37


and other experiences with diversity, internships, and capstone projects. High-impact practices

(HIPs) are positively associated with persistence and GPA, higher student engagement, higher

rates of faculty-student interactions and increases in student learning. Learning communities and

service learning have demonstrated significant gains in the first and second year in the areas of

deep learning, personal gains, level of academic challenge, and supportive campus environment

(Kuh & O’Donnell, 2013).

To increase the quality, frequency and assessment of the integration of HIPs, the

university will establish a faculty development and mini-grant program. The program will design

and implement high impact practices to impact retention and student success through increased

engagement and faculty-student interactions. There is strong evidence of models that have

successfully impacted retention through engagement (Siedman, 2012; Tinto, 2012). The priority

will be placed on implementing strategies for freshmen and sophomores. The HIPs initiative

will be led by a new faculty member hired through the grant (academic integration coordinator).

This position will be institutionalized at the conclusion of the grant. Two current faculty leaders

from different faculty disciplines will be selected through an application process to help train

faculty, review mini-grant proposals, and provide ongoing development.

The three components described above are designed to work cohesively to bring about

increased persistence, completion, and student success. They will be supported by new state-of-

the-art data analysis capabilities to facilitate institutional research, enable longitudinal

assessment of key performance indicators, and maximize the time spent with students. In

addition, data on the effectiveness of intervention strategies will be collected following IRB-

approved protocols. That will allow the dissemination of best practices to the educational

community after the completion of the grant. The implementation strategy and methods outlined

38


below allows for all components to be tested and refined by the end of the grant. The methods in

the table below are staggered, adding new capacities over time.

KEY PERSONNEL

Title III Coordinator (15% time on project; 100% institutionally funded)

This position is responsible for the implementation and oversight of the proposed project,

and will lead all project initiatives, budgets, and staff. This position reports directly to the

President.

Position Responsibilities – Title III Coordinator

Serve as the liaison to the Department of Education Title III officials

Provide overall leadership for the project and activities

Report progress to the President and the Cabinet

Monitor project progress and ongoing collection of data for formative and summative evaluation

Facilitate institutionalization of activities and ongoing budget

Manage the budget, ensuring expenditures are in compliance with federal regulations and project objectives

Lead grant steering committee meetings to provide oversight and suggestions to meet grant objectives

Approve and disseminate progress reports college-wide

Lead ongoing review of data collection and reporting systems for grant activities

Dr. Glena Temple, Vice President for Academic Affairs, will serve as the Title III

Coordinator. The priorities in this project closely align with Dr. Temple’s responsibilities at

Viterbo University, as increased retention and graduations rates are a strategic priority for the

institution. Dr. Temple currently provides leadership for all Colleges and academic programs,

academic advising, student retention, academic support services, and institutional research. Dr.

Temple has 14 years of experience at Viterbo (as faculty, dean, and associate VP), and during the

last academic year returned to serve as Vice President for Academic Affairs. Previously, Dr.

Temple was Dean and chief operating officer for University of Wisconsin Colleges Online and

Distance Education, provided oversight for a unit serving over 6,000 students including

recruitment, advising, academics, business office, marketing and instructional design. Dr.

Temple has a Ph.D. from the University of California Riverside in Botany and Plant Sciences,

39


and a M.A. in Education Policy and Administration with a higher education focus from the

University of Minnesota.

Activity Director (90% time on project, 100% institutionally funded, 12 month)

The Activity Director will assume day-to-day management of the project. This position

reports directly to the Title III Coordinator/VPAA.

Position Responsibilities—Title III Activity Director/Director of Retention

Coordinate advertising, screening, hiring and training of grant personnel

Supervise grant personnel

Communicate effectively with a variety of campus offices to achieve grant objectives

Monitor the budget

Coordinate quarterly, yearly and end-of-project evaluation report generation

Provide day-to-day supervision of grant activities to achieve objectives

Meet regularly with IT Director to ensure effective integration of technology

Assist the coordinator with the DOE reporting and steering committee reports

Oversee grant timelines and objectives

Build faculty and staff support for the grant activities

Tina Johns, M.B.A, will serve as the Activity Director with a new title of Director of

Retention. Her current responsibilities as the Director of Student Success at Viterbo make her

uniquely qualified to launch this activity quickly and effectively. She coordinates the Student

Success Program for high-risk students, and supervises academic advising. She currently

manages the early alert system, student probation processes, and the pilot retention efforts.

Currently, many paper-based processes and the lack of real-time data result in inefficiencies.

Tina has experience supervising personnel, leading task forces, launching initiatives, and

managing budgets. Tina has served in this position for five years, and previously served as an

academic counselor for nursing students. She was recently selected as “Employee of the Year”

demonstrating the community respects her work. The majority of her current job duties are

congruent with the grant. The VPAA will reassign Tina’s current responsibilities that are not

directly related to the project to non-grant personnel at Viterbo.

Assistant Director of Retention (90% time on project, 100% institutionally funded)

40


The Assistant Director of Retention will assist in all grant activities, but with a focus on

leading the improved advising system and conversion to an electronic advising platform. This

position reports directly the Activity Director.

Position Responsibilities—Assistant Director of Retention (12-month)

Coordinate implementation and training of the developmental advising model and electronic advising system

Assist the Director of Retention on grant activities, as needed

Coordinate weekly early alert reports

Work with students in the Center for Student Success

Staff “drop in and virtual” hours each week

Lead the four-year plan initiative (for all freshmen to have a four year plan developed)

Participate in cohort training and assist faculty with advising issues

Build faculty and staff support for the grant activities

Lisa Konkel, Ph.D., will serve as the Assistant Director of Retention. Lisa currently

coordinates academic advising (66% of her job) and teaches (33%). Once the grant begins, she

will no longer teach in order to assist in broader grant activities.

Key Personnel Hired for the Title III Grant

Title Responsibilities Qualifications

Advisor-

At Risk Focus

(12 month)

Provide ongoing advising and mentoring for students

Hold drop in hours at virtual advising in addition to

scheduled appointments with students

Coordinate the peer leader program, first generation

panel and other activities focused on at-risk students

Offer workshops/activities for at-risk students

Assist the Director and Assistant Director as needed

Collaborate with Title III staff, faculty and other staff

Master’s degree in higher

education, counseling or

related field

Experience in mentoring or

advising

Outstanding communication

and organizational skills

Prior experience working with

at-risk student populations

Advisor-

Career Focus

(12 month)

Provide ongoing advising and mentoring for students

Hold drop-in hours for virtual advising in addition to

scheduled appointments with students

Coordinate career workshops, retreats, and other

resources focused on career counseling/planning

Collaborate with the Director of Career Services


Collaborate with Title III staff, faculty and other staff

Master’s degree in higher

education, counseling or

related field

Experience in mentoring

Outstanding communication

and organizational skills

Prior web experience preferred

Project

Assistant (12

month)

Prepare quarterly reports on grant objectives

Coordinate data for formative and summative evaluation

Create and manages dashboards for the grant projects

Assist the grant staff on data analysis and reporting

Archive data, reports/ minutes/documents for the grant

Maintain the grant website

Lead communication efforts through the student portal

Schedule trainings, external evaluator visits, grant

meetings, cohort rotations, etc.

Bachelor’s degree in

communications or related

field

Strong technology skills

Demonstrated professional

writing skills

Analytical skills and ability to

build and manage spreadsheets

Strong organizational and

interpersonal skills required.

41


The At-Risk Student Advisor would be hired to start January 1, 2016, so she/he can assist

with mentoring students on probation from fall semester, staffing the student success center, and

planning for the summer outreach efforts. The Career Focus Advisor would be hired to begin

August 1, 2016, with the significant work load of advising and mentoring students beginning in

the fall. The start date in August will allow for a month of training prior to the start of classes.

Over the summer, the advisors will contact all students by phone/email/chat and provide advising

Monitor resources are accessible to all populations and

disability statements are on grant material


Collaborate with multiple offices on campus

Ability to learn and use new

software and online tools

Systems

Integration

Specialist (12

month)

Work as part of the grant team in support of data use for

decision making at all levels of the Institution.

Review, analyze and evaluate business systems and user

needs to determine opportunities that can improve

efficiency of business processes and decision making.

Support systems integration to aide in end user

utilizations as well as maintain security/integrity of data.

Provide oversight, planning, implementation and support

of the Document Imaging/Management Solution, the

Portal and Data Reporting & Dashboarding systems.

Work with Director & Assistant Director of Retention to

provide data analysis reporting structures that will aide

in meaningful/targeted retention efforts.

Work with various campus departments on process

mapping to determine opportunities for document

workflow automation.

Write technical procedures and documentation for the

applications including operations, user guide, etc.

Work with IT to provide training and resources for end

users of the new systems.

BA/BS Degree, preferably in

information systems or

information technology

Strong project management

skills with effective results

focus within an information

systems environment.

Experience with

Dashboarding/Reporting from

a variety of data sources

required

Experience with Document

imaging system

implementation a plus

Strong Understanding of data

relationships, data integrity,

reporting and SAAS security

Experience with the

extraction/transformation of

data from various type of

databases

Experience in management of

Server

hardware/storage/software

Faculty/Acade

mic

Integration

Coordinator

(10 month)

Teaches ½ time to freshmen and sophomores modeling

best practices in use of early alerts and high impact

practices

Coordinate high-impact practices components, including

mini-grant process, training, evaluation of projects

Coordinate the selection of two high impact faculty

appointed to assist the component

Provide workshops, training, and one-on-one assistance

to faculty and student support offices

Advise students

Assist in the school-specific retention initiative

Appropriate disciplinary

expertise for faculty position

Experience with high-impact

practices

Experience with faculty

development and training

Prior college-level teaching at

the freshmen and sophomore

level

42


and mentoring at a distance. In addition, planning for fall workshops/retreats, peer mentoring

will occur based on data and outcomes from the previous year.

PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN

As a Vice President with university-wide authority who reports directly to President

Artman, Dr. Temple has sufficient authority to conduct the project and ensure that the Activity

Director has the necessary authority to carry out the activity. The Activity Director, Tina Johns,

will report to Dr. Temple on all aspects of implementation, and she will work closely to ensure

each activity is implemented according to federal guidelines. Dr. Temple will also work with the

External Evaluator to document progress in achieving activity objectives.

Responsibilities of Title III Coordinator, Dr. Glena Temple

Task Description

Monitor the T3

personnel to

ensure objectives

are met

Meet weekly with the Activity Director to ensure implementation timetables are followed

and assist with implementation as necessary.

Require Quarterly Reports from the Activity Director, due in January, April, July, and

October, which will document implemented tasks and difficulties encountered.

Reports will describe objectives expected in the next quarter and outlined changes

needed.

Oversee budget Authorize Title III expenditures and ensure that grant funds are used for the intended

purposes.

Approve any modifications following Title III guidelines.

Ensure effective

evaluation Ensure effective internal evaluation by regularly reviewing reports on key performance

indicators generated by the Project Assistant using Ellucian Analytics program.

Review external evaluator reports and incorporate findings.

Conduct

reporting Review end-of-year reports generated by the Activity Director and share with the task

force prior to submission to U.S. Department of Education.

Oversee task

force Chair task force that meets monthly to discuss progress, obstacles, and strategies for

changes.

Title III Task Force: The Pathways Task Force will be comprised of key administrators

and faculty who meet monthly to facilitate project coordination and integrate project initiatives

with related, ongoing institutional activities. To ensure effective institutionalization, the group

will regularly evaluate barriers to institutionalization and develop strategies to address them.

Members of the team will include Dr. Temple (Chair), the Activity Director (Director of

Retention), all Academic Deans, the Director of Career Development, the Vice President for

43


Finance and Administration, the Director of Institutional Research, the Assistant Director of

Retention, the Gateway Course Coordinator, the Director of IT and representative faculty.

Lines of Authority: The Title III structure reflects Viterbo’s existing organizational

structure and ensures that the Project Coordinator and Activity Director have sufficient authority

to implement the project effectively, including directly reporting to the President.

EVALUATION PLAN

Organizational Chart of Institutional Decision Makers

The purpose of the evaluation plan is to provide senior leadership at Viterbo with reliable

information on the progress of the grant objectives and its impact on the institution. The

evaluation will also serve to inform the project team and be submitted to the Department of

Education to document progress on the objectives. The information will also help test the

effectiveness of various aspects of the project, which will allow modification to project

implementation if necessary.

The Project Assistant, under the direction of the Activity Director and Director of

Institutional Research, will collect and analyze data through several longitudinal studies to assess

various aspects of project effectiveness. In addition, the university will retain an experienced

External Evaluator, who will provide an impartial, objective assessment of progress made toward

meeting activity objectives and institutionalizing project initiatives, make recommendations for

Activity Director/Director of

Retention Title III

Grant Team

External

Evaluator

Advisor (At-risk

focus)

Advisor (Career

counseling focus)

President Rick Artman

Title III Project Coordinator, Vice President for Academic Affairs, Dr. Glena Temple

Project

Assistant

Director

of IR

Systems Integration

Specialist

Director

of IT

44


collecting evaluative data, and assess the degree to which the project is addressing institutional

problems. An experienced evaluator will also be able to anticipate future problems and suggest

ways to strengthen activity effectiveness. The evaluator will be a member of the American

Evaluation Association and possess: 1) experience in evaluating Title III projects, 2) expertise in

evaluation processes and procedures, 3) an understanding of the current Federal Title III

regulations, and 4) knowledge of advising and academic initiatives that support student retention.

Formative evaluation will emphasize continuous improvement, identify potential problems or

inefficiencies, and propose solutions. The evaluation will enable appropriate adjustments to

tasks, timelines, and allocation of resources. The external evaluator will also conduct a

summative evaluation to measure if targets are met, provide a yearly report of project outcomes,

and assess the entire project.

Examples of Formative and Summative Evaluation Questions

Formative Summative

To what extent are the goals/objectives of the project achieved?

To what extent have the implementation strategies been met?

Is there other evidence that indicates project effectiveness in

meeting the stated goals/objectives?

What barriers to implementation exist, and how are they being

addressed?

To what extent is the project being institutionalized?

How can the project be strengthened or modified?

How have grant funds supported the

documented impact?

How have grant activities been

institutionalized?

How has the activity impacted the

problems addressed in the proposal?

What evidence supports the impact of

the activity on the institution and the

problems addressed?

The External Evaluator will assist in establishing the evaluation system and assess

progress towards achieving the implementation timetable tasks and activity objectives each year.

The Evaluator will visit the campus at least twice annually and provide a mid-year and end-of-

year report. The mid-year report will be formative, while the end-of-year report will be both a

formative and a summative assessment of the grant progress. Results will be shared with the

educational community through peer-reviewed publications after the grant is complete.

External Evaluator Tasks Anticipated Date

Meet with the Task Force to review evaluation plan and establish baseline data Fall 2015

45


Visit campus to monitor project; evaluation focuses on formative data Spring each year

Prepare and submit mid-year report, which focuses on formative data used to

improve project implementation

Within one month after

spring visit each year

Visits campus to monitor project; includes formative and summative data Fall each year

Prepare and submit year-end report of formative and summative data, on progress

of grant objectives

Within one month after

fall visit each year

Prepare and submit end-of-grant period report of summative data and overall

institutional impact.

Fall of final grant year

(2020)

Data Elements and Analysis: Activity personnel and the Director of IR at Viterbo will

work collaboratively to collect, organize, and analyze data that documents progress of the

Pathways Project and its impact on the institution, students, faculty, and stakeholders. Standard

descriptive and inferential techniques will be used for data analysis. Statistics will be presented

objectively and quantitatively, where possible. Where appropriate, data will be analyzed using

statistical software. Qualitative and descriptive approaches to data analysis will enable the

identification of relationships among stakeholder perspectives and the attainment of project

objectives. Students in the intrusive mentoring program will be surveyed once a year for

feedback. Faculty will be surveyed after each training session for continuous improvement of

the grant implementation plan. Participants in workshops and trainings (faculty, staff, students)

will be asked to complete a short survey for feedback. Creation of activity dashboards will allow

the team to quickly and frequently determine progress. The following table depicts all data

elements, baselines, data collection methods, and expected outcomes for each activity objective

and performance indicator. The Project Assistant will ensure baseline data are collected in the

first six months of the grant and that end-of-year data collection procedures measuring objectives

and performance indicators are established.

46


Data collection methods for each outcome

Objective/Performance Indicators Baseline Data

elements

Data

Collection

Expected Outcome by Year

1 2 3 4 5

1.1 Increase four-year graduation

rates for first-time full-time freshmen

from 30% to 36%

30% 4-yr grad

rate

IR report - - - 33% 36%

1.1a Increase % of seniors on track to


TBC Degree audit

and 4-yr plan

AD

Report

- -

- - 6%

1.1b Increase % of juniors on track to


TBC Degree audit

and 4-yr plan

AD

Report

- - 6% 8%

1.1c Increase % of sophomores on track

to graduate in four years

TBC Degree audit

and 4-yr plan

AD report - 6% 8% 10%

1.2 Increase the overall fifth-semester

retention from 60% to 70%

58% 5th sem.

Retention

IR report - 62% 64% 67% 70%

1.2a Increase the percent of intervention

plans implemented for freshman and

sophomore students with early alert

warnings in two or more classes

Less

than

5%

Starfish

reports;

advising

records

AD

Report

- 40% 60% 75% 75%

1.2b Increase the number of virtual

services launched that are targeted at

student success and retention (virtual

student help, virtual advising help,

student portal for one stop help, virtual

tutoring, online career explorations)

0 Services

offered

AD

Report

1 3 5 6 6

1.2c Increase the career programming

opportunities targeted to freshmen and

sophomores (workshops, retreats, etc.)

0 Services

offered

AD

Report

2 4 6 8 10

1.3 Increase fifth-semester retention of

at-risk students (undeclared freshmen,

low income, low HS preparation) from

48% to 58%

48% 5th sem.

retention

IR Report - 50%

52% 54% 58%

1.3a Increase the percentage of members

of at-risk student population that work

with a Pathways advisor trained in

supporting at-risk students in a variety of

areas to 90%

Less

than

5%

Mentor

records

AD report - 45% 90% 90% 90%

1.3b Increase the number of at-risk

students who participate in programming

targeted to at-risk freshmen and

sophomores (first generation panel,

financial literacy training, college

survival skills, etc)

Less

than

5%

Program

records

AD report 10% 25% 50% 50% 50%

1.3c Increase the percent of at-risk

students who participate in peer

mentoring in the freshmen year

Less

than

5%

Program

records

AD report - 10% 25% 50% 50%

2.1 Increase the percent of freshmen

and sophomores who are supported by

the VU developmental advising model

to 80%

0 Advising

system

reports

ADR

report

20% 40% 60% 80% 80%

2.1a 95% of full time advisors will

complete training on developmental

advising model as part of a coordinated

cohort model

0 Training

records

SIS report 25% 60% 95% 95% 95%

47


2.1b 90% of full time advisors and

student support staff will complete

training on software to support advising

as part of a coordinated cohort model

0 E-Planner

report

ADR report 20% 50% 90% 90% 90%

2.1c Increase the percentage of new

students who have completed “key

advising checkpoints” in the first two

years at Viterbo in the new advising

system to 80%

0 Advising

records

ADR report 20% 40% 60% 80%


and transfer students who have a

graduation plan that has been reviewed

by their Pathways advisor and program

by the end of year one to 90%

0 Electronic

advising file

ADR report 25% 50% 90% 90% 90%

2.2a Increase the percentage of second

semester freshmen who have developed

a four year degree plan as part of the

new VU developmental advising model

to 90%

0 Electronic

advising file

ADR report 25% 50% 90% 90% 90%

2.2b Increase the percentage of first

semester transfer students who have a

graduation plan developed as part of the

new VU developmental advising model

to 90%

0 Electronic

advising file

ADR report 25% 50% 90% 90% 90%

2.2c Increase the percentage of

freshmen who seek career planning

resources as part of their four-year

graduation plan as part of the new VU

developmental advising model to 40%

0 Course

records

AD report - 20% 30% 40% 40%

3.1 Increase the percent of programs

with action plans for improved

retention and academic integration to

90%

0 TracDat ret.

Assess. Plans

IR report - 20% 50% 90% 90%

3.1a Increase the percent of full-time

faculty and student support staff who

complete training in retention and

academic integration from 0 to 90%

0 Training

records

SIS 25% 50% 90% 90% 90%

3.1b Increase in the percent of programs

with five-year retention plans on file to

90%

0 TracDat

assess.

IR report - 10% 50% 90% 90%

3.1c Increase the percent of schools

with retention dashboards through

analytics with comments integrated in

the year-end reports from 0 to 100%

0 VPAA files AD report - - 20% 50% 100%


and sophomore engaged in new

academic integration strategies to

promote retention and success to 60%

0 Participation

records

AD report - 10% 30% 50% 60%

3.2a Increase the number of new high

impact practices aimed at freshmen and

sophomores launched to 25

0 Summary of

plans

ADR report - 6 15 20 25

3.2b Increase in the percent of schools

with five-year academic integration

plans for freshmen and sophomores on

file to 100%

0 TracDat

Asses

IR report - 10% 50% 100% 100%

48


pathways to student success: an integrated, technology ... · the university has developed degree...

Documents