Survey of Entering
Student Engagement
Kirkwood Community College
2014 Key Findings
Table of Contents
Benchmarks of Effective Educational Practice With Entering Students
Aspects of Highest Student Engagement
Aspects of Lowest Student Engagement
Academic and Student Support Services
Academic Goal Setting and Planning
2
4
5
6
8
1
Benchmarks of Effective Educational Practice With Entering Students
SENSE Benchmarks
★ Early Connections
When students describe their early college
experiences, they typically reflect on occasions when
they felt discouraged or thought about dropping out.
Their reasons for persisting almost always include one
common element: a strong, early connection to
someone at the college.
★ High Expectations and Aspirations
Nearly all students arrive at their community colleges
intending to succeed and believing that they have the
motivation to do so. When entering students perceive
clear, high expectations from college staff and faculty,
they are more likely to understand what it takes to be
successful and adopt behaviors that lead to
achievement. Students then often rise to meet
expectations, making it more likely that they will attain
their goals. Often, students’ aspirations also climb, and
they seek more advanced credentials than they
originally envisioned.
★ Clear Academic Plan and Pathway
When a student, with knowledgeable assistance,
creates a road map—one that shows where he or she is
headed, what academic path to follow, and how long it
will take to reach the end goal—that student has a
critical tool for staying on track. Students are more
likely to persist if they not only are advised about what
courses to take, but also are helped to set academic
goals and to create a plan for achieving them.
Continued on Page 3
The Survey of Entering Student Engagement
(SENSE ) benchmarks are groups of conceptually
related survey items that address key areas of
entering student engagement. The six benchmarks
denote areas that educational research has shown to
be important to entering students’ college
experiences and educational outcomes; thus, they
provide colleges with a useful starting point for
looking at institutional results.
Ideally, colleges engage entering students in all six
benchmark areas, beginning with a student’s first
contact with the institution and continuing through
completion of the first three weeks of the initial
academic term. This time is decisive because
current research indicates that helping students
succeed through the first academic term can
dramatically improve subsequent success, including
completing courses and earning certificates and
degrees.
While many student behaviors and institutional
practices measured by the benchmarks can and
should continue throughout students’ college
careers, the SENSE items and the resulting data
focus on this critical entering student timeframe.
SENSE benchmark scores are computed by
averaging the scores on survey items composing the
benchmarks. Benchmark scores are standardized to
have a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 25
across all entering student respondents.
Benchmark Scores
Figure 1a
90
80
67.9
70
60
50
55.0
60.9
57.3
50.0
50.0
44.4
47.0
50.0
40
30
20
Early Connections
Kirkwood Community College
High Expectations
and Aspirations
2014 SENSE Cohort
Clear Academic
Plan and Pathway
2014 Top-Performing Colleges*
*Top-Performing Colleges are those that scored in the top 10 percent of the cohort by benchmark.
Notes: Benchmark scores are standardized to have a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 25 across all respondents. For further
information about how benchmarks are computed, please visit www.cccse.org.
2
Benchmarks of Effective Educational Practice With Entering Students
The standardized benchmark scores allow
colleges to gauge and monitor their performance
in areas of entering student engagement. In
addition, participating colleges have the
opportunity to make appropriate and useful
comparisons between their performance and that
of groups of other colleges.
SENSE Benchmarks
Continued from Page 2
★ Effective Track to College Readiness
Nationally, more than six in 10 entering community
college students are underprepared for college-level
work. Thus, significant improvements in student
success will hinge upon effective assessment,
placement of students into appropriate courses, and
implementation of effective strategies to ensure that
students build academic skills and receive needed
support.
Performing as well as the national average or a
peer-group average may be a reasonable initial
aspiration, but it is important to recognize that
these averages are sometimes unacceptably low.
Aspiring to match and then exceed
high-performance targets is the stronger strategy.
★ Engaged Learning
Instructional approaches that foster engaged learning
are critical for student success. Because most
community college students attend college part-time,
and most also must find ways to balance their studies
with work and family responsibilities, the most effective
learning experiences will be those the college
intentionally designs.
Community colleges can differ dramatically on
such factors as size, location, resources,
enrollment patterns, and student characteristics.
It is important to take these differences into
account when interpreting benchmark
scores—especially when making institutional
comparisons. The Center for Community College
Student Engagement has adopted the policy
“Responsible Uses of CCSSE and SENSE Data,”
available at www.cccse.org.
★ Academic and Social Support Network
Students benefit from having a personal network that
enables them to obtain information about college
services, along with the academic and social support
critical to student success. Because entering students
often don’t know what they don’t know, colleges must
purposefully create those networks.
SENSE uses a three-year cohort of participating
colleges in all core survey analyses. The current
cohort is referred to as the 2014 SENSE Cohort
(2012-2014) throughout all reports.
For further information about SENSE benchmarks,
please visit www.cccse.org.
Benchmark Scores
Figure 1b
90
80
70
60
50
61.3
58.8
52.1
50.0
46.3
50.0
53.5
57.2
50.0
40
30
20
Effective Track to
College Readiness
Kirkwood Community College
Engaged Learning
2014 SENSE Cohort
Academic and
Social Support Network
2014 Top-Performing Colleges*
*Top-Performing Colleges are those that scored in the top 10 percent of the cohort by benchmark.
Notes: Benchmark scores are standardized to have a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 25 across all respondents. For further
information about how benchmarks are computed, please visit www.cccse.org.
3
Aspects of Highest Student Engagement
Benchmark scores provide a manageable starting point for reviewing and understanding SENSE data. One way to
dig more deeply into the benchmark scores is to analyze those items that contribute to the overall benchmark score.
This section features the five items across all benchmarks (excluding those for which means are not calculated) on
which the college scored most favorably and the five items on which the college scored least favorably relative to
the 2014 SENSE Cohort.
The items highlighted on pages 4 and 5 reflect the largest differences in mean scores between the institution and the
2014 SENSE Cohort. While examining these data, keep in mind that the selected items may not be those that are
most closely aligned with the college’s goals; thus, it is important to review all institutional reports on the SENSE
online reporting system at www.cccse.org.
Figure 2 displays the aggregated frequencies for the items on which the college performed most favorably relative to
the 2014 SENSE Cohort. For instance, 83.7% of Kirkwood Community College students, compared with 74.1% of
other students in the cohort, responded strongly agree or agree on Item 18a. It is important to note that some colleges’
highest scores might be lower than the cohort mean.
Figure 2
Aggregated Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
92.8%
83.7%
86.7%
87.7%
85.5%
74.1%
67.6%
53.1%
36.6%
37.1%
18a
18i
18j
18r
18s
Strongly agree or Agree Strongly agree or Agree Strongly agree or Agree Strongly agree or Agree Strongly agree or Agree
Kirkwood Community College
Table 1
2014 SENSE Cohort
Benchmark
Item
Number
Item
Early Connections
18a
Felt welcomed at this college
Early Connections
18i
The college provided me with adequate information about financial assistance
Early Connections
18j
A college staff member helped me determine whether I qualified for financial
assistance
Academic and Social Support Network
18r
At least one instructor learned my name
Academic and Social Support Network
18s
I learned the name of at least one other student in most of my classes
Notes:
For Item(s) 18, strongly agree and agree responses are combined.
4
Aspects of Lowest Student Engagement
Figure 3 displays the aggregated frequencies for the items on which the college performed least favorably relative to
the 2014 SENSE Cohort. For instance, 24.8% of Kirkwood Community College students, compared with 32.5% of
other students in the cohort, responded at least once on Item 19e. It is important to note that some colleges’ lowest
scores might be higher than the cohort mean.
Aggregated Percentage
Figure 3
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
57.8%
47.9%
35.8%
32.5%
26.3%
24.8%
17.7%
11.3%
10.6%
19e
At least once
19i
At least once
19k
At least once
16.8%
20d2
At least once
20f2
At least once
Kirkwood Community College
2014 SENSE Cohort
Table 2
Benchmark
Item
Number
Item
Engaged Learning
19e
Frequency: Participated in supplemental instruction
Engaged Learning
19i
Frequency: Participated in a required study group outside of class
Engaged Learning
19k
Frequency: Used an electronic tool to communicate with another student about
coursework
Engaged Learning
20d2
Frequency: Used face-to-face tutoring
Engaged Learning
20f2
Frequency: Used writing, math, or other skill lab
Notes:
For Item(s) 19, except 19c, 19d, 19f, and 19s, once, two or three times, and four or more times responses are combined.
For Item(s) 20, once, two or three times, and four or more times responses are combined.
5
Academic and Student Support Services
The bar charts across pages 6 and 7 display frequency results for five items related to academic and student support
services. Figure 4 focuses on whether or not faculty communicated information regarding these services to students
by the end of the third week of the academic term. Figures 5-12 focus on whether or not students knew about
specific support services, and if so, how often they reported using those services by the end of the third week of the
academic term. To access complete frequency reports, please visit the SENSE online reporting system via
http://www.cccse.org.
Percentage
Figure 4: All instructors clearly explained academic and student support services available at this college.
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
46.7%
42.4%
25.6% 27.2%
20.4% 20.3%
0.9%
2.1%
Strongly
disagree
6.4%
8.1%
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly
agree
Kirkwood Community College (N=640)
2014 SENSE Cohort (N=98,328)
100
90
80 76.4% 77.1%
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Knew about
service
Kirkwood Community College (N=637)
2014 SENSE Cohort (N=98,547)
6
Figure 6: If so, how often did you use academic advising/planning services?
Percentage
Percentage
Figure 5: Did you know about academic
advising/planning services?
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
46.3% 44.0%
39.4%
28.8%
23.0%
11.5%
2.8%
Never
Once
Kirkwood Community College (N=486)
Two or
three times
4.1%
Four or
more times
2014 SENSE Cohort (N=74,879)
100
90
80
70
60
51.4%
50 48.8%
40
30
20
10
0
Figure 8: If so, how often did you use career counseling services?
Percentage
Percentage
Figure 7: Did you know about career
counseling services?
Knew about
service
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Percentage
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1.6%
Two or
three times
1.6%
Four or
more times
2014 SENSE Cohort (N=49,366)
79.5%
8.2% 10.8%
Once
Kirkwood Community College (N=528)
3.6%
6.0%
Two or
three times
0.8%
3.8%
Four or
more times
2014 SENSE Cohort (N=74,050)
Figure 12: If so, how often did you use writing, math, or other skill lab
services?
Percentage
Figure 11: Did you know about writing,
math, or other skill lab services?
Percentage
Once
7.7%
87.4%
Never
Kirkwood Community College (N=639)
2014 SENSE Cohort (N=98,114)
Kirkwood Community College (N=635)
2014 SENSE Cohort (N=97,868)
4.3%
Figure 10: If so, how often did you use face-to-face tutoring services?
Knew about
service
Knew about
service
23.8%
16.5%
Kirkwood Community College (N=309)
Figure 9: Did you know about face-to-face
tutoring services?
100
90
80 76.5% 73.3%
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
66.8%
Never
Kirkwood Community College (N=642)
2014 SENSE Cohort (N=98,284)
100
90 84.1%
76.9%
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
77.6%
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
67.1%
53.4%
Never
12.9% 15.4%
12.3% 13.9%
Once
Two or
three times
Kirkwood Community College (N=478)
17.3%
7.7%
Four or
more times
2014 SENSE Cohort (N=70,159)
7
Academic Goal Setting and Planning
Most community colleges have academic and goal setting policies that are intended to help all students start right.
Yet, often these policies, even when they are ostensibly mandatory, might not be implemented in ways that ensure
success for all students. The disaggregated data below illustrate the student experience with academic goal setting
and planning at your college. Nationally, more than 60% of community college students are enrolled less than full
time. Thus, while looking at these data, it is important to consider the institution’s enrollment patterns. Are all of
your entering students starting right?
Figure 13
100
90
80
Percentage
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Full-time
N= 630
Less than
full-time
N= 86
Full-time
N= 630
18e. An advisor
helped me to
select a course of
study, program, or major
Strongly agree
Less than
full-time
N= 86
Full-time
N= 630
18f. An advisor
helped me to
set academic goals
and to create a
plan for achieving them
Agree
Less than
full-time
N= 85
18g. An advisor
helped me to
identify the courses
I needed to
take during my
first semester/quarter
Neutral
Disagree
Full-time
N= 631
Less than
full-time
N= 86
18h. A college
staff member
talked with me
about my commitments
outside of school
to help me figure out
how many courses to take
Strongly disagree
Table 3
18e
Full-time
Strongly agree
27.0%
Agree
Neutral
18g
Full-time
Less than
full-time
20.9%
16.0%
30.8%
37.2%
19.7%
19.8%
Disagree
16.5%
Strongly disagree
6.0%
Response
8
18f
Less than
full-time
18h
Full-time
Less than
full-time
Full-time
Less than
full-time
12.8%
31.9%
21.2%
11.7%
11.6%
21.4%
19.8%
38.3%
40.0%
21.1%
16.3%
29.5%
36.0%
13.8%
18.8%
26.6%
27.9%
15.1%
26.3%
18.6%
10.3%
11.8%
30.6%
27.9%
7.0%
6.7%
12.8%
5.7%
8.2%
10.0%
16.3%