The Power of Partnerships: Lessons
for Higher Education
John N. Gardner
The Odyssey of a Typical
University Professor
 Thrust into University 101 leadership
 University101: a vehicle for the
creation of partnerships
 Academic affairs and student affairs
working together to support the
academic mission
 Collaborating to define first-year
student success
Two Decades of Leadership for
First-Year Efforts
This broad definition of first-year student success is
achievable only through partnerships.
Academic Success/GPA
Relationships
Identity Development
Career Decision Making
Health & Wellness
Faith & Spirituality
Multicultural Awareness
Civic Responsibility
Retention – the baseline
 The greatest influence on new students is that of other
students.
 Learning takes place anywhere there are students, faculty and
staff members interacting.
 We are more likely to achieve student success through
partnerships that integrate learning, both inside and outside the
curriculum.
 The preeminent goal of partnerships is academic success.
Key Assumptions
 A shared vision, jointly developed, for student success
 Shared resources – including personnel and money
 Joint reporting lines
 Functional integration; curricular/
co-curricular integration
 A willingness to ask for and
offer help
 A willingness to share
responsibility, credit,
and blame
Elements of a Student
Success Partnership
 Big picture thinking
 A capacity for organizational
unselfishness
 A willingness to come together for
what’s best for students, the
institution, my unit, and others we
serve
 A willingness to plant the seed and
let others run with it (and even take
credit)
Elements of Partnerships
 Formal agreements based on informal
understandings
 A plan for public dissemination and
assessment of partnership agreements
 A connection of the agreements to the institution’s
mission statement and strategic plan
Official, Formalized Components
 A willingness to give up something
you started when it needs to be
institutionalized somewhere else
 Getting people to work together
who ordinarily would not interact
with each other
 A decided preference for
collaboration over competition
Elements of Partnerships
 More available resources – people and money
 Each unit gets the benefits of talents, skills, capacity and
political support it wouldn’t have on its own
 Reduces or eliminates unnecessary duplication and waste
of resources
 Is a model of best practice for illustration and emulation
 Teaches students by example
 Student success more likely to be the outcome
Practical Advantages of
Partnerships
Partnerships to Enhance
Student Success
Academic & Student Affairs Leaders’ Institute 2012
Jillian Kinzie, Associate Director
Indiana University Center for
Postsecondary Research and NSSE
nsse.iub.edu
Interdependent View of
Undergraduate Education
Intellectual
Development
Transformative
Education
Social/Emotional
Development
Undergraduate Education Experience
12
Interdependent View Propositions:
• Believe:
– Students whole collegiate experience provides
a platform for learning
– Learning is holistic, outcomes cross the
cognitive-affective domain
– Student success is everyone’s business
• Requires:
– Acknowledging many ways of learning
– Synergistic relationships across institutional
divisions
– Undo false dichotomies
Faculty – attending to
students intellectual
development
Student Affairs –
focusing on
students’ social &
emotional
development
14
Plotting A Course to Partnerships
Ways must be found
to overcome the
artificial,
organizational
bifurcation of our
educational delivery
systems – P. Terenzini
15
Partnership Lessons from Educationally
Effective and Improving Institutions
1. Project DEEP – studied 20 highperforming institutions to document
educational effectiveness
a. Project DEEP 5 year follow-up – what
sustains educational effectiveness?
2. Learning to Improve – identify factors
fostering institutional improvement
16
Project DEEP:
A study of 20 HighPerforming Institutions
What do
educationally
effective
institutions do to
foster student
engagement and
success?
Six Shared Conditions of Educationally
Effective Institutions
1. “Living” Mission and “Lived” Educational
Philosophy
2. Unshakeable Focus on Student Learning
3. Environments Adapted for Educational
Enrichment
4. Clearly Marked Pathways to Student
Success
5. Improvement-Oriented Ethos
6. Shared Responsibility for
Educational Quality
Shared Responsibility for
Educational Quality
• Students, all staff, and faculty are
partners in educating students
• Faculty & student affairs educators fuel
the collaborative spirit
• Caring, supportive
community
19
SSiC Follow Up: Educational
Effectiveness - Guaranteed to Last?
Checked back with DEEP schools 5 years
later…
• NSSE results about the same – a few
slips, a few gains
• Graduation rates comparable, or better
- 7 schools increased by 6%, & 3 by 10%
• Six shared conditions still hold
Keys to Sustaining the
Student Success Agenda
a. Student success is an
institutional priority when
everyone--especially campus
leaders--make it so.
b. Stay “positively restless” – pay
attention to data that matters for
student success
c. Enhanced partnerships between
student and academic affairs
21
Studying Quality Improvement
1,500 baccalaureate
institutions in NSSE 20002011
600 institutions
administered NSSE 4+ times
OPPORTUNITY: What can
we learn about
institutional improvement
and change?
22
Are Institutions Improving?
Yes.
University of Texas-San Antonio
23
Conditions that Fostered Improvement
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Grants, Pilots, External Initiatives
Stability & Trust in Leadership
Physical space/creation of new learning spaces
Comprehensive & Targeted strategic planning
Data Informed & Culture of continuous
improvement
6. Strong role of faculty – impact of generational
change
7. Intentional partnerships in administrative
areas – Student and Academic Affairs
Partnerships: First-Year Focus
“We have always done a lot to help students stay in
college and think about how we move students out
successfully.” -- Lynchburg College faculty member
• Low persistence rate in 2005
captured everyone’s attention…
formed Student Success Team
• Sent dozens faculty & staff to FYE
conference
25
Robust Partnerships Between
Student & Academic Affairs
• Change facilitated
by a robust
partnership
between academic
& student affairs
Perplexing Question:
If partnerships are so essential to
educational effectiveness and
improved conditions for learning and
success, then why are they so
difficult to achieve? Why are
partnerships the
exception rather
than the rule?
27
Exploring Partnerships:
Lessons Learned
Charles Schroeder
Major Triggering Events
 Declining enrollment…huge drop in freshman class (-29%)
& residence hall occupancy down 34% (6200 to 4100).
 Three large residence halls closed…debt rating in jeopardy
 Course availability / scheduling a challenge
 Poor legislative relationships…skepticism / anger
 CBHE establishes new retention (R) / graduation (G) rate
standards … R=85% vs. 78%; G= 65% vs. 59%
 Finding opportunity in adversity !
Context: 1992 University of
Missouri
New Chancellor establishes a compelling aim:
“Recapture the public’s trust by rededicating the University
to high quality undergraduate education”
Compelling Aim
 Restore enrollment and residence hall occupancy.
 Improve course scheduling through more effective
curriculum management for first-year students.
 Elevate the intellectual climate of the campus by enhancing
first-year student engagement.
 Achieve the new CBHE retention / graduation rate standards
by 1998
 And, by the way, do all of this with limited funding!!!!
Goals and objectives
 Three institutional leaders : VPSA; Associate Dean A&S;
Chair Biology Dept.
 Cross-functional core team: residence life; registrar; English
department; admissions & campus writing program
 Developed 12 FIGS (Freshman Interest Groups) … three
common courses & common assignment to floors.
 Initial assessment led to creation of three residential
colleges, 87 FIGs and 46 sponsored learning communities
by 1999 (“70 by 99”).
Primary strategy: Create a residential
learning community program
 Achieved CBHE performance standards (G=68%; R=85%)
 Increased enrollment & filled the residence halls
 Much higher NSSE scores on all five benchmarks
 70% (4200) of all first-year students now in learning
communities
 LC`s the “signature program” of MU-- 7%+ to graduation
 Graduation rates of “at-risk students” (family income
<48,000 and HSGPA < 2.75) FIG vs. non-FIG
45.6%
vs. 34.2 %
+ 11.4%
Program Outcomes
 Triggering events and “self-interests” can be catalysts …
focus on issues of consequence!
 A shared vision and shared resources are critical
 Understanding and acceptance of differences are key (i.e.
using and integrating the strengths of partners)
 Communicate, coordinate, collaborate constantly!
 Leadership is critical: Think big…plan long term
 Be flexible…adapt as necessary and take risks
 Examine prevailing mental models and embrace the notion
“To create the future, challenge the past”
Lessons learned