Teaching & Learning Presentations
George Hollich (PSY120) and Marcy
Towns (CHEM115) will talk about their
IMPACT course redesign experiences
PACT FACTS FOR
STUDENT SUCCESS
Factors Affecting Student Success
& Retention
A Series of TED(like) Talks on:
• Grouped Data to Predict & Compare
Academic Success Rates
• At-Risk Students
• CODO and Student Success
• Co-curricular Effects on Student
Success
NOVEMBER 6, 2012
• Effect of Residence Hall Living on
Student Success
• What Predicts Grad Student Success?
Brent Drake,
EMAR
Brenda
Schroeder,
Advising
Andy Zehner,
Student Affairs
FACTORS AFFECTING STUDENT
SUCCESS & RETENTION AT
PURDUE
Kevin Maurer,
Housing & Food
Services
Phil Pope,
Graduate School
November 6, 2012
GROUPED DATA
BRENT DRAKE,
ASSISTANT VICE PROVOST & DIRECTOR
ENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS & REPORTING
GROUPED DATA
PREDICTIONS
MULTIPLE CORRELATIONS AT SINGLE
INSTITUTION
Multiple correlations between measures of academic success and unit level
student entering academic profiles at one institution tend to lead to correlations
of low to moderate effect sizes (Bridgeman, McCamley-Jenkins, & Ervin, 2000)
Some reasons identified in the literature (Stumpf & Stanley, 2002)
•
•
•
Restriction of range inherent in any one institutions academic profile
The interdependence of academic profile variables from high school transcripts
and standardized tests
The disparate academic experience of students in one institution
GROUPED DATA
PREDICTIONS
SOLUTION BASED ON NATIONAL SAMPLE
Based on Stumpf and Stanley’s 2002 article use grouped data items readily
available in two national data sets
•
Integrated Post-Secondary Education Data System (IPEDS)
– 25th and 75th percentile of SAT Scores
•
US News and World Report National Colleges data set
– Percentage of students in top ten percent of high school class
Criterion variable was six-year graduation rates pulled from IPEDS
Final data set consisted of 199 institutions
Multiple correlation for model R2 = 0.8025 distinguishing between graduation
rates at different institutions
GROUPED DATA
PREDICTIONS
PURDUE RESULTS
Use national model at university level to predict success among different
subgroups
• how well are individual colleges performing versus their predicted
performance
Overall, Purdue outperforms its predicted rate
• Most recent US News Report showed Purdue as a four percentage point
over performance as well
The majority of the colleges on the campus over perform as well
• Wide range in performance (-6.75 to +38.88)
AT SECTION
RISK STUDENTS
TITLE
BRENT DRAKE,
ASSISTANT VICE PROVOST & DIRECTOR
ENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS & REPORTING
SURVEY RESULTS
AT RISK STUDENTS
Freshmen students surveyed at end of their first year
•
•
Questions asked about likelihood of persistence, graduation, and commitment
to determine students risk of returning
Purdue has administered last 6 years
52.0%
51.2%
Academic factors
44.6%
23.7%
26.2%
20.8%
Financial factors
20.4%
20.2%
Campus environment
29.2%
3.9%
2.4%
5.4%
Advisement/support services
0%
10%
20%
2012
2010
30%
2008
40%
50%
60%
ACADEMIC FACTORS
AT RISK STUDENTS
10.4%
I am not challenged enough academically
46.4%
12.1%
The academic work load is more than I want
39.3%
56.9%
34.3%
28.6%
32.8%
I am interested in an academic program at another
institution
The academic program does not match up with my
career goals
25.0%
20.7%
40.3%
14.9%
17.9%
17.2%
I’m having trouble getting the major I want
0%
2012
64.2%
10%
2010
20%
2008
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
AT RISK STUDENTS
FINANCIAL FACTORS
43.8%
39.3%
44.4%
I think I can get the same level of education for a
better price elsewhere
I need to go to an institution that is significantly less
expensive than Purdue even if it means getting a lesser
education
25.0%
25.0%
24.4%
18.8%
I feel that I cannot afford the cost of attending any
school at this time
28.6%
26.7%
12.5%
I think I can get a better education for the same price
elsewhere
7.1%
4.4%
0%
2012
5%
2010
10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%
2008
CAMPUS ENVIRONMENT
AT RISK STUDENTS
I would prefer to have more social opportunities
50.0%
50.0%
40.0%
I would prefer a school with fewer students
68.0%
50.0%
55.3%
28.0%
33.3%
21.1%
I would prefer more economic diversity
16.0%
21.1%
I would prefer more racial and ethnic diversity
33.3%
24.0%
16.7%
10.5%
I don’t like living in the city
16.0%
16.7%
13.2%
I would prefer a school with more students
0%
2012
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
2010
2008
CODO-IN SURVEY
SECTION
TITLE
BRENDA SCHROEDER,
ACADEMIC ADVISING ASSESSMENT TEAM
CODO-IN SURVEY
ACADEMIC ADVISING
ASSESSMENT TEAM
The Goal of the
Academic Advising Assessment Team
is to gain a better awareness and understanding of
the strengths and weaknesses of advising at Purdue.
Ultimately, it is the team's hope that this process
will help improve advising on campus.
CODO-IN SURVEY
SURVEY INSTRUMENT
• Given to all students who CODO
• Designed to collect information on:
–how students are CODOing,
–why they are CODOing,
–how they are selecting their majors
RESOURCES
CODO-IN SURVEY
Resources for Learning CODO-IN Requirements
(CODO- Change of Degree Objective/Change of Curricula)
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
2008 - Spring
2008 - 2009
2009 - 2010
2010 - 2011
Examples
Other: Advisors, Ivy Tech Community College, Krannert, Laying Tracks, Own Research, Walk-Ins
Courses: AGEC 20300, AGEC 33100, CDFS 21000, COM 11400, COM 25000, EDPS 10500, EDPS 20000, GS 11900, HIST 15100, MGMT 10000, OLS 25200, OLS 27400, PHPR 10000, PSY
22200, SOC 10000
INFLUENCERS
CODO-IN SURVEY
Factors Influencing CODO Decision
(CODO – Change of Degree Objective/Change of Curricula)
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Spring 2008
2008 - 2009
2009 - 2010
2010 - 2011
GPA OF CODO STUDENTS
CODO-IN SURVEY
Current Overall GPA
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
4.00
3.50 - 3.99
2008 - Spring
3.00 - 3.49
2008 - 2009
2.50 - 2.99
2.00 - 2.49
2009 - 2010
1.50 - 1.99
2010 - 2011
1.49 or less
DEMOGRAPHICS OF
CODO STUDENTS
CODO-IN SURVEY
Gender
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
2008 - Spring
2008 - 2009
2009 - 2010
Female
2010 - 2011
Male
Ethnicity
1000
800
600
400
200
0
African American
2008 - Spring
American Indian
Asian American
2008 - 2009
Caucasian
American
2009 - 2010
Hispanic American
Other
2010 - 2011
WHERE DO THEY CODO TO?
CODO-IN SURVEY
CODO-IN
College/Program/School
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
2008 - Spring
2008 - 2009
2009 - 2010
2010 - 2011
WHERE DO THEY CODO FROM?
CODO-IN SURVEY
CODO-OUT College/Program/School
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
2008 - Spring
2008 - 2009
2009 - 2010
2010 - 2011
CODO-IN SURVEY
THREE EXPECTATIONS OF
ACADEMIC ADVISOR
CO-CURRICULAR
ACTIVITIES & ACADEMIC
SECTION
SUCCESS
TITLE
ANDY ZEHNER,
ASSESSMENT & DATA ANALYST
STUDENT AFFAIRS
Students
who
do both,
do best
CO-CURRICULAR
ACTIVITIES
PURDUE STUDENTS
ALL GRADE CLASSIFICATIONS
3.40
3.30
3.20
3.10
3.00
2.90
2.80
Engaged
Purdue
2.70
2.60
1
2
3
4
Semester
5
6
7
8
CO-CURRICULAR
ACTIVITIES
STUDENT PERFORMANCE
BY COLLEGE
Average GPA
Average Credits Earned
Pct. 3/15
College or School
Engaged
Purdue
Engaged
Purdue
Engaged
Purdue
College of Liberal Arts
2.99
2.80
15
14
41.5%
34.1%
First Year Engineering
3.09
2.89
18
16
55.1%
42.8%
College of Science
3.10
2.92
16
14
50.0%
36.2%
College of Health & Human Sci
3.25
3.08
16
15
55.0%
42.4%
College of Technology
3.15
2.85
16
14
53.4%
36.4%
College of Agriculture
3.09
2.83
16
15
48.6%
38.6%
School of Aero and Astro Engr
3.05
2.79
16
13
43.9%
31.3%
School of Management
3.18
2.99
16
15
51.4%
45.2%
CO-CURRICULAR
ACTIVITIES
WHAT IS THE
RELATIONSHIP?
• Academic success co-varies with
engagement
• Academic success is subsequent to
engagement
• Engagement promotes academic success
CO-CURRICULAR
ACTIVITIES
HOW DOES ENGAGEMENT
PROMOTE ACADEMIC SUCCESS?
• Most engaged students are excellent to begin
with
• Engagement imposes order & discipline
• Getting involved caps out-of-class activity
• Expectations are high
• Special tutoring is provided
• Mens sana in corpore sano
• Some course credits are relatively easy
CO-CURRICULAR
ACTIVITIES
ACADEMICS IS PRIMARY FOCUS
31% OF SAO’S 900+ CLUBS/ORGANIZATIONS
Non-academic,
450
Academic, 390
Mixed/
uncertain, 415
CO-CURRICULAR
ACTIVITIES
3 OUT OF 5 STUDENTS DEVOTE LESS THAN
5 HRS/WK TO CO-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES
40%
Percent of respondents
35%
30%
25%
Freshmen
20%
Seniors
15%
10%
5%
0%
None
1-5
hrs
6-10
hrs
11-15
hrs
16-20
hrs
21-25
hrs
Over
25 hrs
RESIDENCE HALLS AND
SECTION
STUDENT
SUCCESS
TITLE
KEVIN MAURER
DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC INITIATIVES & ASSESSMENT
HOUSING AND FOOD SERVICES
UNIVERSITY
RESIDENCES
POPULATIONS LIVING ON CAMPUS
University Residences is one of the largest collegiate
housing operations in the nation
•
•
Capacity of 11,779
No live-in requirement for students
Fall 2012 Occupancy
Single Undergrads
Single Grads
Families
Total
92.2% of beginning
students chose to live
in UR for Fall 2012
10,696
265
622
11,583
35.6% of all undergrads chose
to live in UR – Fall 2012
UNIVERSITY
RESIDENCES
POPULATIONS LIVING ON CAMPUS
West Lafayette Undergraduate Students Living in University Residences
100%
75%
50%
25%
0%
Freshman
Sophomore
Junior
Senior
2008-09
75.9%
29.2%
13.2%
8.1%
2009-10
76.2%
34.5%
13.9%
9.4%
2010-11
77.4%
34.6%
16.2%
9.3%
2011-12
75.0%
34.8%
15.5%
9.9%
2012-13
79.9%
35.2%
17.6%
10.4%
UNIVERSITY
RESIDENCES
FIRST YEAR TO SECOND
YEAR RETENTION
Beginning Student First Year to Second Year Retention Rates
95%
90%
90%
87%
87%
86%
83%
85%
86%
83%
86%
85%
85%
91%
89%
91%
88%
84%
85%
82%
80%
80%
80%
79%
80%
75%
70%
66%
65%
60%
2000 - 2001 2001 - 2002 2002- 2003 2003 - 2004 2004 - 2005 2005 - 2006 2006 - 2007 2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011 2011 - 2012
Residing in University Residences
The 2008-09 cohort data is accurate, but represents an anomaly.
Not Residing in University Residences
UNIVERSITY
RESIDENCES
STUDENT SUCCESS
FRESHMEN GRADE POINT AVERAGE
Freshman UR Resident vs. Non-Resident Cumulative Spring Semester GPA
2.90
2.85
2.80
2.75
2.70
2.65
2.60
2.55
2.50
2.45
2.40
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Freshmen Resident
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Freshmen Not Residing in UR
2011
2012
UNIVERSITY
RESIDENCES
STUDENT SUCCESS
SOPHOMORE GRADE POINT AVERAGE
Sophomore UR Resident vs. Non-Resident Cumulative Spring Semester GPA
3.10
3.05
3.00
2.95
2.90
2.85
2.80
2.75
2.70
2.65
2.60
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Sophomore Resident
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Sophomore Not Residing in UR
2012
UNIVERSITY
RESIDENCES
STUDENT SUCCESS
JUNIOR GRADE POINT AVERAGE
Junior UR Resident vs. Non-Resident Cumulative Spring Semester GPA
3.30
3.25
3.20
3.15
3.10
3.05
3.00
2.95
2.90
2.85
2.80
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Junior Resident
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Junior Not Residing in UR
2011
2012
UNIVERSITY
RESIDENCES
STUDENT SUCCESS
SENIOR GRADE POINT AVERAGE
Senior UR Resident vs. Non-Resident Cumulative Spring Semester GPA
3.25
3.20
3.15
3.10
3.05
3.00
2.95
2.90
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Senior Resident
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Senior Not Residing in UR
2011
2012
2010 NSSE DATA
DIFFERENCES AMONG FRESHMEN
RESIDENTS AND NON-RESIDENTS
On-Campus Freshmen were significantly more likely to:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Included diverse perspectives in class discussions or writing assignments
Worked with other students on projects during class
Worked with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments
Had serious conversations w/ students of a different race/ethnicity than your own
Had serious conversations with students who are very different from you in terms
of their religious beliefs, political opinions, or personal values
Had coursework that emphasized:
– Analyzing the basic elements of an idea, experience, or theory, such as
examining a particular case or situation in depth and considering its
components
– Synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences into new,
more complex interpretations and relationships
– Making judgments about the value of information, arguments, or methods,
such as examining how others gathered and interpreted data and assessing
the soundness of their conclusions
Have done or plan to do: Community service or volunteer work
Have done or plan to do: Work on a research project with a faculty member
outside of course or program requirements
2010 NSSE DATA
DIFFERENCES AMONG FRESHMEN
RESIDENTS AND NON-RESIDENTS
On-Campus Freshmen were significantly more likely to:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Have supportive relationships with other students
Spend more time preparing for class
Feel the institution encourages contact among students from different economic,
social, and racial or ethnic backgrounds
Feel the institution provides the support you need to thrive socially
Had experiences that contributed to:
– Acquiring a broad general education
– Speaking clearly and effectively
– Thinking critically and analytically
– Analyzing quantitative problems
– Working effectively with others
– Learning effectively on your own
– Understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds
– Solving complex real-world problems
Rate their entire educational experience at Purdue as good or excellent
Say they would attend Purdue again if they could start over
2010 NSSE DATA
DIFFERENCES AMONG FRESHMEN
RESIDENTS AND NON-RESIDENTS
Off-Campus Freshmen were significantly more likely to:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Asked questions in class or contributed to class discussions
Used e-mail to communicate with an instructor
Discussed grades or assignments with an instructor
Have done or plan to do: Independent study or self-designed major
Spend more time working for pay off campus
Spend more time providing care for dependents living with you (parents, children,
spouse, etc.)
EXPLANATIONS?
Committed to Student Success
•
•
•
•
•
Learning Communities
39 communities with 1,129 residents
Resident Assistants
254 student role models & peer
mentors living in the halls
UR Global & BGRi
Initially a UR international mentor
program; now collaborating on an
early orientation program with ISS
and SATS along with 3 iRAs
Co-Curricular Activities
Over 5,100 programs resulting in
almost 190,000 meaningful contact
hours; Faculty Fellow program
Simply Community
Inherent benefits of living with peers
POSSIBLE FACTORS
FACTORS AFFECTING
GRAD
STUDENT
SECTION
TITLE
RETENTION & SUCCESS
PHIL POPE
SENIOR ASSOCIATE DEAN
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
GRAD STUDENT
SUCCESS
MASTER’S COMPLETION
AND ATTRITION
Years of completion
Master’s Completion and Attrition Data
Student Cohorts from Fall 2002 – Spring 2007
Fall 2012 Assessment
Years of Attrition
Total
Years of Completion/Attrition
Completion/
Attrition count
%
Cum%
Less than 1 year
679
12.48%
12.48%
2-3 years
4048
74.43%
86.91%
4-5 years
593
10.90%
97.81%
more than 6 years
119
2.19%
100.00%
Total Completion
5439
Less than 1 year
867
63.70%
63.70%
2 year
340
24.98%
88.68%
3 year
114
8.38%
97.06%
More than 4 years
40
2.94%
100.00%
Total Attrition
1361
GRAD STUDENT
SUCCESS
PHD COMPLETION
AND ATTRITION
Years of completion
Ph.D. Completion and Attrition Data
Student cohorts from Fall 1997 – Spring 2002
Fall 2012 Assessment
Years of Attrition
Total
Years of Completion/
Attrition
Completion/
Attrition count
%
Cum%
Less than 4 years
415
21.73%
21.73%
5-6 years
962
50.37%
72.09%
7-8 years
376
19.69%
91.78%
more than 9 years
157
8.22%
100.00%
Total Completion
1910
Less than 1 year
30
5.30%
5.30%
2-3 years
341
60.25%
65.55%
4-5 years
114
20.14%
85.69%
More than 6 years
81
14.31%
100.00%
Total Attrition
566
GRAD STUDENT
SUCCESS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
FACTORS INFLUENCING COMPLETION
AND TIME TO DEGREE
Relationships With Major Professors/Mentors
Qualifying/Preliminary Exams
Defined Research Project
Academic/ Professional Environment
Personal/Family Related Stresses
Financial Stresses
Social Stresses
GRAD STUDENT
SUCCESS
INITIATIVES
- Mentoring Workshops for Faculty
- Purdue Graduate Student Government (PGSG) –
Mentoring Workshops
- Peer Mentoring
- E-Mentoring Program
- Dean’s Annual E-Discussions
- Appointment and Re-appointment of Graduate Faculty
- Graduate Program Assessment
- Graduate School Ombudsman
GRAD STUDENT
RETENTION ATTRITION
SUCCESS Retention Attrition DataBYbyCOLLEGE
Academic College
Years of
completion
College
Years of
completion
Years of
Attrition
College of Agriculture
Years of
completion
Years of
Attrition
College of Education
Years of
Attrition
Colege of Engineering
Years of Completion/Attrition
Completion/Attrition count
%
Cum%
Less than 4 years
5-6 years
7-8 years
more than 9 years
Total Completion
Less than 1 year
2-3 years
4-5 years
More than 6 years
Total Attrition
Less than 4 years
5-6 years
7-8 years
more than 9 years
Total Completion
Less than 1 year
2-3 years
4-5 years
More than 6 years
Total Attrition
Less than 4 years
5-6 years
7-8 years
more than 9 years
Total Completion
Less than 1 year
2-3 years
4-5 years
More than 6 years
Total Attrition
72
90
19
9
190
3
26
6
4
39
27
40
20
16
103
4
6
0
2
12
148
238
75
32
493
12
82
16
25
135
37.89%
47.37%
10.00%
4.74%
37.89%
85.26%
95.26%
100.00%
7.69%
66.67%
15.38%
10.26%
7.69%
74.36%
89.74%
100.00%
26.21%
38.83%
19.42%
15.53%
26.21%
65.05%
84.47%
100.00%
33.33%
50.00%
0.00%
16.67%
33.33%
83.33%
83.33%
100.00%
30.02%
48.28%
15.21%
6.49%
30.02%
78.30%
93.51%
100.00%
8.89%
60.74%
11.85%
18.52%
8.89%
69.63%
81.48%
100.00%
GRAD STUDENT
SUCCESS
RETENTION ATTRITION
BY COLLEGE
Retention Attrition Data by Academic College
Years of
completion
College
Years of
completion
Years of
Attrition
College of Health and Human Science
Years of
completion
Years of
Attrition
College of Liberal Arts
Years of
Attrition
College of Pharmacy
Years of Completion/Attrition
Completion/Attrition count
%
Cum%
Less than 4 years
5-6 years
7-8 years
more than 9 years
Total Completion
Less than 1 year
2-3 years
4-5 years
More than 6 years
Total Attrition
Less than 4 years
5-6 years
7-8 years
more than 9 years
Total Completion
Less than 1 year
2-3 years
4-5 years
More than 6 years
Total Attrition
Less than 4 years
5-6 years
7-8 years
more than 9 years
Total Completion
Less than 1 year
2-3 years
4-5 years
More than 6 years
29
72
32
12
145
0
18
12
6
36
30
77
38
35
180
0
20
13
7
40
22
51
12
1
86
1
10
6
1
20.00%
49.66%
22.07%
8.28%
20.00%
69.66%
91.72%
100.00%
0.00%
50.00%
33.33%
16.67%
0.00%
50.00%
83.33%
100.00%
16.67%
42.78%
21.11%
19.44%
16.67%
59.44%
80.56%
100.00%
0.00%
50.00%
32.50%
17.50%
0.00%
50.00%
82.50%
100.00%
25.58%
59.30%
13.95%
1.16%
25.58%
84.88%
98.84%
100.00%
5.56%
55.56%
33.33%
5.56%
5.56%
61.11%
94.44%
100.00%
GRAD STUDENT
RETENTION ATTRITION
SUCCESS Retention Attrition DataBYbyCOLLEGE
Academic College
Years of
completion
College
Years of
completion
Years of
Attrition
College of Science
Years of
completion
Years of
Attrition
College of Technology
Years of
Attrition
Interdisciplinary and Special
Programs
Years of Completion/Attrition
Completion/Attrition count
%
Cum%
Less than 4 years
5-6 years
7-8 years
more than 9 years
Total Completion
Less than 1 year
2-3 years
4-5 years
More than 6 years
Total Attrition
Less than 4 years
5-6 years
7-8 years
more than 9 years
Total Completion
Less than 1 year
2-3 years
4-5 years
More than 6 years
Total Attrition
Less than 4 years
5-6 years
7-8 years
more than 9 years
Total Completion
Less than 1 year
2-3 years
4-5 years
More than 6 years
Total Attrition
55
282
135
38
510
5
147
45
28
225
0
0
0
5
5
0
1
0
2
3
4
50
26
5
85
1
9
8
4
10.78%
55.29%
26.47%
7.45%
10.78%
66.08%
92.55%
100.00%
2.22%
65.33%
20.00%
12.44%
2.22%
67.56%
87.56%
100.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
100.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
100.00%
0.00%
33.33%
0.00%
66.67%
0.00%
33.33%
33.33%
100.00%
4.71%
58.82%
30.59%
5.88%
4.71%
63.53%
94.12%
100.00%
4.55%
40.91%
36.36%
18.18%
4.55%
45.45%
81.82%
100.00%
GRAD STUDENT
SUCCESS
RETENTION ATTRITION
BY COLLEGE
Retention Attrition Data by Academic College
Years of
completion
College
Years of
completion
Years of
Attrition
Krannert School of Management
Years of
completion
Years of
Attrition
School of Veterinary Medicine
Years of
Attrition
Total
Years of Completion/Attrition
Completion/Attrition count
%
Cum%
Less than 4 years
5-6 years
7-8 years
more than 9 years
Total Completion
Less than 1 year
2-3 years
4-5 years
More than 6 years
Total Attrition
Less than 4 years
5-6 years
7-8 years
more than 9 years
Total Completion
Less than 1 year
2-3 years
4-5 years
More than 6 years
Total Attrition
Less than 4 years
5-6 years
7-8 years
more than 9 years
Total Completion
Less than 1 year
2-3 years
4-5 years
More than 6 years
Total Attrition
19
50
13
3
85
3
17
7
1
28
9
12
6
1
28
1
5
1
1
8
415
962
376
157
1910
30
341
114
81
566
22.35%
58.82%
15.29%
3.53%
22.35%
81.18%
96.47%
100.00%
10.71%
60.71%
25.00%
3.57%
10.71%
71.43%
96.43%
100.00%
32.14%
42.86%
21.43%
3.57%
32.14%
75.00%
96.43%
100.00%
12.50%
62.50%
12.50%
12.50%
12.50%
75.00%
87.50%
100.00%
21.73%
50.37%
19.69%
8.22%
21.73%
72.09%
91.78%
100.00%
5.30%
60.25%
20.14%
14.31%
5.30%
65.55%
85.69%
100.00%
Brent Drake,
EMAR
Brenda
Schroeder,
Advising
Andy Zehner,
Student Affairs
QUESTIONS
www.purdue.edu/assessment
Kevin Maurer,
Housing & Food
Services
Phil Pope,
Graduate School
November 6, 2012