Second-year Transformational Experience Program

STEP

Leslie AlexanderAssociate Professor, AAAS

Planning for the STEP Program

Faculty Involvement

• Faculty participation is a central part of STEP’s mission and purpose. Thus, faculty were involved in designing every aspect of the STEP academic plan.

Faculty Think Tank—Spring 2012 Faculty Committee—October 2012–May

2013 Faculty Advisory Committee—August 2013-

Present

STEP Faculty Committee

Committee Charge

• Develop a plan for the academic component of the STEP program, including its academic goals and faculty roles and responsibilities.

• Collaborate across the university to create programming and activities that cultivate and enhance faculty interactions with students outside the classroom.

STEP Faculty Committee

Committee Charge

• Create and propose a system of reward and recognition that properly acknowledges and values the contributions of faculty participating in the program.

• Recruit faculty for the program, beginning with the first 50 faculty members for the pilot program in the 2013-2014 academic year.

STEP Faculty Committee

Goals

• To encourage and facilitate increased intellectual interaction between faculty, students, and staff.

• To improve access to resources on campus and in the community that support students’ goals.

• To model the benefits of a general education.

• To provide opportunities to reflect upon personal growth and development.

STEP Student Outcomes

Purpose

• To manifest and support an environment at OSU in which faculty, students, and staff work together to shape meaningful intellectual relationships that enliven the core academic mission of the university.

STEP Student Outcomes

Access

• Students know where and how to find resources—on campus and in the community—to support their career goals.

• They gain insight about the Six Experiences and how participation in these areas can enhance their lives and educational experience.

STEP Student Outcomes

Community

• Students become part of a community of scholars in which they feel a reciprocal connection to Ohio State faculty, staff, and peers.

* According to the NSSE, 50% of graduating seniors reported that they have never interacted with a faculty member outside the classroom

STEP Student Outcomes

Self-Awareness

• Students start to identify how they learn best, they are able to make sense of the curriculum, and they demonstrate an ability to reflect on their personal growth into self-directed life-long learners and global citizens.

STEP Academic Plan

The STEP Faculty Interaction Series

Structure:

• In order to facilitate faculty/student interactions, students were organized into cohorts composed of no more than 20 students.

• One STEP Faculty member was assigned to each cohort.

STEP Academic Plan

• STEP cohorts will also be organized into “houses” with 4-5 cohorts in each group.

• Houses are designed to give broad representation of faculty experiences and academic interests.

• Organizing into houses allows for collaboration among faculty and opportunities for students to interact with multiple faculty members.

STEP Academic Plan

Activities and Content:

• Autumn Semester is designed to create community within each cohort and introduce students to the Six Experiences.

• During Spring Semester, students continue meeting with their STEP Faculty member and peers to discuss their plans for how to use their fellowship towards one of the Six Experiences.

STEP Faculty Recruitment

• Faculty Recruitment was critical to STEP’s success

• Challenge for committee was that the best faculty for this program were also the busiest faculty on campus

• Led to broader discussions about faculty reward and recognition  

Faculty Reward and Recognition

• The STEP Faculty Committee recognized that STEP’s success is dependent upon a fundamental culture shift in how faculty activities are valued.

• Lengthy discussion about whether participants should receive course release or direct financial compensation  

STEP Faculty Recruitment

• Ultimately, faculty recruitment was surprisingly easy and successful although many colleagues expressed concern about the time commitment

• The committee hosted lunches with targeted faculty to recruit and gain feedback

• Used personal networks and Student Life resources to identify potential faculty 

STEP Faculty Recruitment

• Final phase was a special reception hosted by Dr. Javaune Adams-Gaston, Dr. Joseph Alutto, and the STEP committee

• Successfully recruited over 70 faculty members and the program officially commenced with the kickoff “rally” that included all student and faculty STEP participants  

Faculty Advisory Committee

• In April of 2013, the STEP Faculty Committee offered suggestions for a governance structure to include a Faculty Director and a Faculty Advisory Committee, both of which are currently in place  

Wayne CarlsonVice Provost of Undergraduate Studies and

Dean of Undergraduate Education

STEP – Pilot Year and Next Steps

First year summary:What did we learn?

Original Charge

• Create a residential-based student experience – “…a living experience that integrates academic achievement, self-awareness, and the development of life and leadership skills.” JAA

• Increase faculty engagement and mentorship, with a primary focus on• Enhancing student success• Improving student engagement and satisfaction• Contributing to post-graduation success

Pilot Program

• Launched Autumn 2013• 1000 residential students, 50 faculty

• Cohorts of 20 students• 5 cohorts per house

• Faculty engagement and developmental programming• Co-curricular experience opportunities• Students develop project proposals around one or more of

6 experiences• Up to $2000 available to defray costs• Student reflection expected

• Think of first year as an intentional learning laboratory• Experiment with program design• Learn best practices• Identify opportunities for improvement

Six STEP Pillars

• Study-abroad• Service learning and community service• Leadership• Internships• Undergraduate research• Artistic and creative endeavors

Co-curricular experience opportunities (Pick 3)

• Global citizenship• Career exploration / preparation• Internships• Health and Wellness• Academic Success and Information Literacy• Financial Literacy (also required)

Participation

• 942 students

60% female, 72% white, 2% international, 98% fulltime, 54%honors or scholars, average GPA – 3.26, 70% 3.0 GPA or better, 43% ASC

• 53 faculty

Equal mix M/F, across all colleges, mostly tenured or tenure track, some lecturers, 2 emeriti

Example proposed projects

• Study in Brazil to work a community service

project

• Promote LGBTQ awareness using a gender-questioning theater production

• Research project with faculty in plastic surgery

• Research on Polish attitudes toward terrorism, corruption, and government intervention (in Poland)

• Participation in the Public Affairs Washington Academic Internship Program

Student survey

• Students feel an increasing connection to their faculty mentor (66%, up from 50%)

• Students feel a strong connection to others in their cohort, but not at all to others in their house

• Many students are “going through the motions” to get access to the fellowship money

• There is a strong sense of “enhanced community” among students across the program (much higher than the feeling related to residence hall community)

• Students felt that the structure and requirements of the program were not clearly articulated, and the nature of the fellowship requirements and usage were ill-defined

Faculty survey

• Faculty felt a strong sense of personal accomplishment with the program, but a little lower sense of professional accomplishment

• The majority of faculty felt supported by their department and professional colleagues, but some expressed concerns that their department peers felt some disdain for the program

• Faculty expressed concerns that their role is being seen by students as a counselor or academic advisor, rather than a mentor

• Faculty see a strong opportunity to make a difference in the lives of students in their cohort

• Faculty similarly felt that the structure and requirements of the program were not clearly articulated, and the nature of the fellowship requirements and usage were ill-defined

Second and third years:Where do we go next?

Next Steps

• Recruiting AY14/15 participants• 1500 students, 75 faculty

• Defining a sustainable funding model

• Developing technology based reporting and data submission/collection tools

• Strengthen the academic content and approach to the program

• Cohorts were populated “randomly” – we’re considering more thematic or focus-based placement

• Develop a set of “best-practice” examples, both of faculty/student interactions and student projects

• We have developed clear guideline documents regarding the structure and program expectations 

• We are discussing a “pooled” approach to the fellowship funds, rather than an individual award, allowing team applications as well as individual requests for support 

Questions?