NSSE 2014 Items of Interest 1
NSSE 2014: Accolades and Action Items
Patrick Barlow, PhD
Assessment Coordinator
Faculty Senate Meeting, Nov 6, 2014
Summary: UW-La Crosse took part in the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) in the spring of 2014. This represents the 9 th time our first year and senior students have completed the questionnaire. The NSSE was revised in 2013 to include new items and five previous benchmark scores were reconfigured into nine engagement indicators. Institutions were also allowed to pick two additional modules of items to pursue unique questions of interest. UW-L made use of the UW System consortium items and the Experiences with Writing module to fill these two slots.
The body of this report will identify areas of accolades based on how our responses compared positively to our UW System peers, Carnegie Class peers, and the entire groups of colleges that participated.
Areas of concern based on negative comparison with these three groups will also be identified.
Recommendations for possible actions to address the concerns are included for discussion.
Accolades:
Engagement Indicator Subscales:
Student responses to the NSSE indicated some positive results in relation to some of the subscales known as Engagement Indicators, standard individual items, questions on the Experiences with Writing, and UW System Consortium modules. Reviewing these in more detail we find that First Year students held positive comparisons across 7 of the 10 Engagement Indicators against UW system Peers. Senior students demonstrated a more impressive pattern in that 6 of 10 indicators showed UW-l students above all three comparison groups. (See Chart of Engagement Indicators and description of them attached).
High Impact Practices (HIPs):
Three HIPs are tracked for First Year students and six for Senior students. Of the items tracked 62% of
First Year students participated in at least one, primarily a service learning experience. Seniors reported a higher rate, 96%, of at least one HIP. Service learning was indicated (76%) along with internship activities (60%), senior capstone experience (62%), and study abroad (23%) at rates higher than comparison groups. (See Chart of HIP participation)
Individual Items (above all 3 comp groups)
First Year students responses indicated a number of positive issues in looking at individual NSSE items.
These were identified by looking for items in which UW-l responses placed us above all three comparison groups. These are grouped as follows:
Items about general academic activities:
• Attended an art exhibit, play or other arts performance (dance, music, etc.)

NSSE 2014 Items of Interest 2
• Asked another student to help you understand course material
• Applying facts, theories, or methods to practical problems or new situations
• Amount of papers written up to 5 pages
Campus relationships with people and offices:
• Quality of Interactions with Student Services Staff
• Quality of interactions with Other administrative staff
• UWL emphasizes using learning support services
• UWL emphasizes providing support for your overall well-being (recreation, health care, counseling)
Use of Time
• Hours per week spent preparing for class, recoded as 16.8 hours a week, (UW peers 14.2 hrs,
Carnegie 13.5 hrs, NSSE overall 14.3 hrs)
• Hours spend per week socializing is higher 14.7 hrs (UW peer 13.4 hrs, Carnegie 12.3 hrs, NSSE
12.6 hrs)
• Time spent in Assigned reading per week, 8.4 hrs, ( UW peers 6.7 hrs, Carnegie 6.6 hrs, NSSE
6.8 hrs)
Overall Satisfaction
• Rating of entire educational experience
• If starting over, would attend UWL again
Senior students showed a longer and more varied list of positive individual item differences. These fell into groups as follows:
Collaborative Learning
• Asked another student to help you understand course material
• Worked with other students on course projects or assignments
Creating connections among ideas and presentations
• Gave a course presentation
• Combined ideas from different courses when completing assignments
• Connected your learning to societal problems or issues
• Connected ideas from your courses to your prior experiences and knowledge
• Applying facts, theories, or methods to practical problems or new situations
Faculty Interaction
• Talked about career plans with a faculty member
• Discussed course topics, ideas, or concepts with a faculty member outside of class

NSSE 2014 Items of Interest 3
Teaching Practices
• Clearly explained course goals and requirements
• Taught course sessions in an organized way
• Used examples or illustrations to explain difficult points
• Provided feedback on a draft or work in progress
Writing tasks
• Evaluated what others have concluded from numerical information
• Amount of papers written up to 5 pages
High Impact Practices
• Participate in an internship, co-op, field experience, student teaching, or clinical placement
• Participate in a study abroad program
• Work with a faculty member on a research project
• Complete a culminating senior experience (capstone course, senior project or thesis, comprehensive exam, portfolio, etc.)
• Number of course including community based project (service Learning)
Campus relationships with people and offices:
• Quality of interactions with students
• Quality of interactions with Faculty
• Quality of interactions with Student Services Staff
• Quality of interactions with other administrative staff and offices
Campus Support
• UWL emphasis on providing support to help students succeed academically
• UWL emphasis on using learning support services (tutoring services, writing center, etc.)
• UWL emphasis on providing opportunities to be involved socially
• UWL emphasis on providing support for your overall well-being (recreation, health care, counseling, etc.) **
• UWL emphasis on helping you manage your non-academic responsibilities (work, family, etc.)
• UWL emphasis on attending events that address important social, economic, or political issues
Use of Time
• Relaxing and socializing (time with friends, video games, TV or videos, keeping up with friends online, etc.)
UWL experience has contributed to knowledge, skills, personal development in:
• Writing clearly and effectively
• Speaking clearly and effectively
• Thinking critically and analytically

NSSE 2014 Items of Interest 4
• Analyzing numerical and statistical information
• Working effectively with others
• Solving complex real-world problems
• Being an informed and active citizen
Overall Satisfaction
• Rating of entire educational experience
• If starting over, would attend UWL again
UW Consortium Items
Each of the 9 comprehensive campuses asked an additional set of select items just within this group.
Our ratings were higher than the system average on the following
First Year Students’ responses indicated the following items were better at UW-L.
Campus Climate
• My institution fosters an environment where persons of all genders are respected.
• My institution fosters an environment where persons of all sexual orientations are respected.
• I feel safe at this institution, no matter where I am or what time of the day it is.
Obstacles to Academic Success
• Family obligations are not an obstacle to academic progress (lower rating, yet positive interpretation)
Quality of teaching, library, research opportunities
• Quality of instruction in their courses
• I believe that adequate opportunities for students to conduct their own research exist on my campus.
• The library on my campus provides sufficient resources for me to complete my academic projects.
•
Senior Students responses showed positive performance on these items.
Campus Climate
• My institution fosters an environment where racial and ethnic diversity is respected.
• My institution fosters an environment where persons of all genders are respected.
• My institution fosters an environment where persons of all sexual orientations are respected.
• I feel safe at this institution, no matter where I am or what time of the day it is.
Obstacles to academic progress
• Family obligations as an obstacle to academic progress (lower rating, yet positive interpretation)

NSSE 2014 Items of Interest 5
Quality of teaching, library, research opportunities
• Rating of the quality of instruction
• I believe that adequate opportunities for students to conduct their own research exist on my campus.
• The library on my campus provides sufficient resources for me to complete my academic projects.
Writing Experiences
A group of 31 colleges across the country chose to administer a set of 13 items tied to writing and developed by the Writing Program Administrators national organization. Items with a positive comparison to the group average included: o
First Year
 Received feedback from a classmate, friend, or family member about a draft before turning in your final assignment
 Gave feedback to a classmate about a draft or outline he or she had written o
Senior Students
 Talked with a classmate, friend, or family member to develop your ideas before starting your assignment
 Received feedback from a classmate, friend, or family member about a draft before turning in your final assignment
 Gave feedback to a classmate about a draft or outline he or she had written
 Summarized material you read, such as articles, books, or online publications
 Analyzed or evaluated something you read, researched, or observed
 Described your methods or findings related to data you collected in lab or field work, a survey project, etc.
 Explained in writing the meaning of numerical or statistical data
 Wrote in the style and format of a specific field (engineering, history, psychology, etc.)
 Addressed a real or imagined audience such as your classmates, a politician, non-experts, etc.
Action Items:
Student responses also indicated areas of concern based on negative comparisons with our peers.
These may serve as areas to consider for future review and action by faculty and staff.
Engagement Indicators
First year scores on the indicators of Learning Strategies, Discussions with Diverse Others, and Student
Faculty Interaction placed us below comparison groups. These areas have been a concern in past administrations of the NSSE in 2008 and 2011. The pattern continues when inspecting Senior student

NSSE 2014 Items of Interest 6 scores on Learning Strategies and Discussions with Diverse others. The low scores tied to diversity lean heavily on the item related to discussions with students who are of a different race/ethnicity.
Individual Items
Several items were not endorsed highly by our students. The following items emerged due to lower average scores as tested against our comparison groups.
First Year Students Items of Concern
Exposure to Alternate Points of View
• Examined the strengths and weaknesses of your own views on a topic or issue
• Tried to better understand someone else's views by imagining how an issue looks from his or her perspective
• Forming a new idea or understanding from various pieces of information
Interaction with Faculty
• Talked about career plans with a faculty member
• Worked with a faculty member on activities other than coursework
(committees, student groups, etc.)
• Discussed your academic performance with a faculty member
Writing assignments
• Papers written of 11 pages or more
• Estimate of number of assigned pages of writing 41.1 pages, (UW peers 39.5 pages, Carnegie 45.2 pages, NSSE 47 pages)
Diversity Issues
• Discussion with People of a race or ethnicity other than your own
• Discussion with People from an economic background other than your own
• UWL emphasis on encouraging contact among students from different backgrounds (social, racial/ethnic, religious, etc.)
Study Habits
• Summarized what you learned in class or from course materials
Learning Communities
• Participate in a learning community or some other formal program where groups of students take two or more classes together
UWL experience contribution towards skills o
Writing clearly and effectively o
Acquiring job- or work-related knowledge and skills

NSSE 2014 Items of Interest 7
Senior Students Items of Concern
Writing Assignments
• Prepared two or more drafts of a paper or assignment before turning it in
• Papers written between 6-10 pages
• Papers written 11 pages or more
• Estimated of assigned pages of student writing (73 pages), (UW peers 68.7 pages, Carnegies 79 pages, NSSE 79.1 pages)
Diversity Issues
• Discussion with People of a race or ethnicity other than your own
• Discussion with People from an economic background other than your own
• UWL emphasizes encouraging contact among students from different backgrounds (social, racial/ethnic, religious, etc.
)
•
Readying and Studying Issues
• Reviewed notes after class
• Estimate of how many study hours are assigned reading
UW Consortium
Less than positive comparisons on the UW consortium items were found for First Year students on items tied to advising and availability of courses.
• My advising interactions help me make better decisions about my academic goals.
• Satisfaction with availability of general education courses to meet requirements
• Obstacle to academic progress: o
Difficulties getting courses you need o
Lack of good academic advising (slight more of problem)
Senior students’ items on this scale indicated more information on what may be obstacles to academic progress o
Lack of personal motivation o
Poor academic performance o
Personal health issues, physical or mental
Writing Experiences
First year students indicated less exposure to the following kinds of writing tasks or instructions.
 Analyzed or evaluated something you read, researched, or observed
 Described your methods or findings related to data you collected in lab or field work, a survey project, etc.
 Argued a position using evidence and reasoning
 Provided clear instructions describing what he or she wanted you to do
 Explained in advance what he or she wanted you to learn

NSSE 2014 Items of Interest 8
Senior student only display one item of lower response on this module tied to instructors actions.
 Explained in advance what he or she wanted you to learn
Recommendations:
Based on the responses to the NSSE and the areas that appeared to present challenges for our campus, the following ideas arise as avenues of possible action
1.
For all students, engaging them in more academic and co-curricular activities that expose them to multiple perspectives and interactions across difference would help address some of the diversity concerns.
2.
Finding paths for first year students to connect with faculty would be advantageous and would build on aspects of our Firm Footing project like Eagle Alert and the advising taskforce.
3.
Ongoing review or our approaches to writing instruction and the nature of writing assignments appears warranted. This may be best started by looking at what is taking place in the first year.
4.
Course access for lower division students as an obstacle to progress may prove to be a good area for review as we are already aware of some issues for access to science courses and the growing national interest on the need to monitor and report on graduation rates.
The NSSE presents much more information that what is shared in this report and college specific reports were just received this week. A raw data set exists so additional analyses can be conducted. Additional discussion of the results are being planned for student and other faculty/staff committees. Please contact the Assessment Coordinator for any follow up or questions.

For NSSE 2013, sets of new, continuing, and updated items (see reverse side) have been grouped within several
Engagement Indicators . These indicators are organized within four engagement themes adapted from the former
Benchmarks of Effective Educational Practice. Forty-seven survey items are included in these Engagement
Indicators. In addition, six former Enriching Educational Experiences items are reported separately as High-Impact
Practices .
Higher-Order Learning
Expanded to focus on distinct dimensions of academic effort, including new topics of interest. In addition, key items on reading, writing, and study time will be reported in this theme.
Learning Strategies
Theme:   Academic   Challenge
Modified to emphasize student-to-student collaboration.
Updated diversity items from
Enriching Educational Experiences have been moved here.
The updated Student-Faculty
Interaction indicator is joined by a second measure about effective teaching practices.
Expanded to focus separately on interactions with key people at the institution and perceptions of the institution’s learning environment.
separately as High-Impact Practices .
Interactions with diverse others have been moved to Learning with Peers.
Theme:   Learning   with   Peers
Student-Faculty Interaction
Theme:   Experiences   with   Faculty
Theme:   Campus   Environment
 Learning  Research with
Community Faculty
 Internship, Field  Culminating
Experience, etc. Experience
 Study Abroad  Service-Learning
Subject to final revision. Last updated 5/1/13

Academic Challenge
Higher-Order Learning
During the current school year, how much has your coursework emphasized the following:

Applying facts, theories, or methods to practical problems or new situations

Analyzing an idea, experience, or line of reasoning in depth by examining its parts

Evaluating a point of view, decision, or information source

Forming a new idea or understanding from various pieces of information
Reflective & Integrative Learning
During the current school year, how often have you:

Combined ideas from different courses when completing assignments

Connected your learning to societal problems or issues

Included diverse perspectives (political, religious, racial/ethnic, gender, etc.) in course discussions or assignments

Examined the strengths and weaknesses of your own views on a topic or issue

Tried to better understand someone else's views by imagining how an issue looks from his or her perspective

Learned something that changed the way you understand an issue or concept

Connected ideas from your courses to your prior experiences and knowledge
Quantitative Reasoning
During the current school year, how often have you:

Reached conclusions based on your own analysis of numerical information (numbers, graphs, statistics, etc.)

Used numerical information to examine a real-world problem or issue (unemployment, climate change, public health, etc.)

Evaluated what others have concluded from numerical information
Learning Strategies
During the current school year, how often have you:

Identified key information from reading assignments

Reviewed your notes after class

Summarized what you learned in class or from course materials
Learning with Peers
Collaborative Learning
During the current school year, how often have you:

Asked another student to help you understand course material

Explained course material to one or more students

Prepared for exams by discussing or working through course material with other students

Worked with other students on course projects or assignments
Discussions with Diverse Others
During the current school year, how often have you had discussions with people from the following groups:

People from a race or ethnicity other than your own

People from an economic background other than your own

People with religious beliefs other than your own

People with political views other than your own
Experiences with Faculty
Student-Faculty Interaction
During the current school year, how often have you:

Talked about career plans with a faculty member

Worked with a faculty member on activities other than coursework
(committees, student groups, etc.)

Discussed course topics, ideas, or concepts with a faculty member outside of class

Discussed your academic performance with a faculty member
Effective Teaching Practices
During the current school year, to what extent have your instructors done the following:

Clearly explained course goals and requirements

Taught course sessions in an organized way

Used examples or illustrations to explain difficult points

Provided feedback on a draft or work in progress

Provided prompt and detailed feedback on tests or completed assignments
Campus Environment
Quality of Interactions
Indicate the quality of your interactions with the following people at your institution:

Students

Academic Advisors

Faculty

Student services staff (career services, student activities, housing, etc.)

Other administrative staff and offices (registrar, financial aid, etc.)
Supportive Environment
How much does your institution emphasize the following:

Providing support to help students succeed academically

Using learning support services (tutoring services, writing center, etc.)

Encouraging contact among students from different backgrounds
(social, racial/ethnic, religious, etc.)

Providing opportunities to be involved socially

Providing support for your overall well-being (recreation, health care, counseling, etc.)

Helping you manage your non-academic responsibilities (work, family, etc.)

Attending campus activities and events (performing arts, athletic events, etc.)

Attending events that address important social, economic, or political issues
Which of the following have you done or do you plan to do before you graduate?

Participate in a learning community or some other formal program where groups of students take two or more classes together

Participate in an internship, co-op, field experience, student teaching, or clinical placement

Participate in a study abroad program

Work with a faculty member on a research project

Complete a culminating senior experience (capstone course, senior project or thesis, comprehensive exam, portfolio, etc.)

About how many of your courses at this institution have included a community-based project (service-learning)?
Subject to final revision. Last updated 5/1/13

NSSE 2014 Engagement Indicators
University of Wisconsin-La Crosse
Engagement Indicators are summary measures based on sets of NSSE questions examining key dimensions of student engagement.
The ten indicators are organized within four themes: Academic Challenge, Learning with Peers, Experiences with Faculty, and
Campus Environment. The tables below compare average scores for your students with those in your comparison groups.
Use the following key:
▲
Your students’
Your students’ average average
was significantly higher (p<.05) with an effect size at least .3 in magnitude.
was significantly higher (p<.05) with an effect size less than .3 in magnitude.
--
No significant difference.
▼
Your students’
Your students’ average average was significantly lower (p<.05) with an effect size less than .3 in magnitude.
was significantly lower (p<.05) with an effect size at least .3 in magnitude.
First-Year Students Your first-year students compared with
Your first-year students compared with
Theme
Academic
Challenge
Learning with
Peers
Engagement Indicator
Higher-Order Learning
Reflective & Integrative Learning
Learning Strategies
Quantitative Reasoning
Collaborative Learning
Discussions with Diverse Others
UW Comprehensives △
△
△
Carnegie Class
--
--
▽
--
Your first-year students compared with
NSSE 2013 & 2014
--
--
▽
--
Experiences with Faculty
Student-Faculty Interaction
Effective Teaching Practices
Campus
Environment
Quality of Interactions
Supportive Environment
Seniors
Theme
Academic
Challenge
Learning with
Peers
Experiences with Faculty
Campus
Environment
Engagement Indicator
Higher-Order Learning
Reflective & Integrative Learning
Learning Strategies
Quantitative Reasoning
Collaborative Learning
Discussions with Diverse Others
Student-Faculty Interaction
Effective Teaching Practices
Quality of Interactions
Supportive Environment
Your seniors compared with
UW Comprehensives △
△
△
Your seniors compared with
Carnegie Class
--
--
▽
△
△
Your seniors compared with
NSSE 2013 & 2014
△
△
△
△
NSSE 2014 ENGAGEMENT INDICATORS • 3

NSSE 2014 High-Impact Practices
University of Wisconsin-La Crosse
Overall HIP Participation
The figures below display the percentage of students who participated in High-Impact Practices. Both figures include participation in a learning community, service-learning, and research with faculty. The Senior figure also includes participation in an internship or field experience, study abroad, and culminating senior experience. The first segment in each bar shows the percentage of students who participated in at least two HIPs, and the full bar (both colors) represents the percentage who participated in at least one.
First-year
UW-L 5%
UW Comprehensives 14%
Carnegie Class 11%
57%
43%
Senior
UW-L
UW Comprehensives
79%
69% 21%
17%
47% Carnegie Class 58% 26%
NSSE 2013 & 2014 12% 46%
0% 25%
Participated in two or more HIPs
50% 75% 100%
Participated in one HIP
NSSE 2013 & 2014 62% 24%
0% 25%
Participated in two or more HIPs
50% 75% 100%
Participated in one HIP
Statistical Comparisons
The table below compares the percentage of your students who participated in a High-Impact Practice, including the percentage who participated overall (at least one, two or more), with those at institutions in your comparison groups.
First-year
11c.
Learning Community
12.
Service-Learning
11e.
Research with Faculty
Participated in at least one
Participated in two or more
UW-L
60
3
%
4
62
5
UW Comprehensives
%
Effect size a
21 *** -.52
49 ***
4
57 *
14 ***
.23
-.05
.10
-.33
Carnegie Class
%
Effect size a
14 *** -.35
53 ***
5 *
58
11 ***
.14
-.10
.07
-.25
NSSE 2013 & 2014
%
Effect size a
15 ***
51 ***
5 **
58 *
12 ***
-.39
.18
-.12
.08
-.27
Senior
11c.
Learning Community
12.
Service-Learning
11e.
Research with Faculty
11a.
Internship or Field Exp.
11d.
Study Abroad
11f.
Culminating Senior Exp.
22
76
29
60
23
62
24
64 ***
25 *
55 *
18 **
49 ***
-.04
.25
.11
.10
.14
.27
23
63 ***
20 ***
46 ***
10 ***
43 ***
-.01
.27
.22
.28
.36
.39
24
61 ***
24 **
50 ***
14 ***
46 ***
Participated in at least one 96 90 *** .25
84 *** .43
85 ***
Participated in two or more 79 69 *** .24
58 *** .47
62 ***
Note. Percentage of students who responded "Done or in progress" except for service-learning which is the percentage who responded that at least "Some"
courses included a community-based project. a. Cohen's h: The standardized difference between two proportions. Effect size indicates the practical importance of an observed difference. An effect size
of .2 is generally considered small, .5 medium, and .8 large.
*p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (z-test comparing participation rates).
-.05
.32
.11
.21
.24
.33
.38
.38
Note. All results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and by institution size for comparison groups).
NSSE 2014 HIGH-IMPACT PRACTICES • 3

NSSE 2014 Snapshot
University of Wisconsin-La Crosse
Students' perceptions of their cognitive and affective development, as well as their overall satisfaction with the institution, provide useful evidence of their educational experiences. For more details, refer to your Frequencies and Statistical Comparisons report.
Perceived Gains Among Seniors
Students reported how much their experience at your institution contributed to their knowledge, skills, and personal development in ten areas.
Perceived Gains
(Sorted highest to lowest)
Thinking critically and analytically
Percentage of Seniors Responding
"Very much" or "Quite a bit"
92%
Working effectively with others
Writing clearly and effectively
Speaking clearly and effectively
84%
81%
80%
77%
Satisfaction with UW-L
Students rated their overall experience at the institution, and whether or not they would choose it again.
Percentage Rating Their Overall Experience as "Excellent" or "Good"
First-year
UW-L
UW Comprehensives
93%
87%
Senior
UW-L
UW Comprehensives
0% 25% 50%
94%
89%
75% 100% Acquiring job- or work-related knowledge
and skills
Solving complex real-world problems 70%
Analyzing numerical and statistical information
Developing or clarifying a personal code
of values and ethics
Being an informed and active citizen
Understanding people of other backgrounds
(econ., racial/ethnic, polit., relig., nation., etc.)
67%
65%
64%
62%
Percentage Who Would "Definitely" or
"Probably" Attend This Institution Again
First-year
UW-L
UW Comprehensives
90%
85%
Senior
UW-L
UW Comprehensives
0% 25% 50%
91%
86%
75% 100%
Response Summary
First-year
Count
828
Resp. rate
35%
Female
65%
Senior 674 36% 65%
Refer to your Administration Summary and Respondent Profile reports for more information.
Full-time
100%
95%
Additional Questions
Your institution administered the following additional question sets:
Experiences with Writing
University of Wisconsin Comprehensives
Refer to your Topical Module and Consortium reports for results.
NSSE annually collects information at hundreds of four-year colleges and universities about student participation in activities and programs that promote their learning and personal development. The results provide an estimate of how undergraduates spend their time and what they gain from attending their college or university. Institutions use their data to identify aspects of the undergraduate experience that can be improved through changes in policy and practice.
NSSE has been in operation since 2000 and has been used at more than 1,500 colleges and universities in the US and Canada.
More than 90% of participating institutions administer the survey on a periodic basis.
Visit our Web site: nsse.iub.edu
IPEDS: 240329
4 • NSSE 2014 SNAPSHOT

NSSE 2014 Engagement Indicators
University of Wisconsin-La Crosse
Collaborating with others in mastering difficult material and developing interpersonal and social competence prepare students to deal with complex, unscripted problems they will encounter during and after college. Two Engagement Indicators make up this theme: Collaborative Learning and Discussions with Diverse Others.
Below are three views of your results alongside those of your comparison groups.
Mean Comparisons
Engagement Indicator
Collaborative Learning
UW-L
Mean
32.5
Your first-year students compared with
UW Comprehensives
Mean
Effect size
Carnegie Class
Mean
Effect size
NSSE 2013 & 2014
Mean
Effect size
30.8
*** .13
31.1
** .10
32.1
.03
Discussions with Diverse Others 36.6
35.9
-.23
40.9
*** -.27
Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard deviation; Symbols on the Overview page are based on effect size and p before rounding.
Score Distributions
Collaborative Learning
60 60
Discussions with Diverse Others
45
30
15
45
30
15
0
UW-L UW
Comprehensives
Carnegie Class NSSE 2013 & 2014
0
UW-L UW
Comprehensives
Carnegie Class NSSE 2013 & 2014
Notes: Each box-and-whiskers chart plots the 5th (bottom of lower bar), 25th (bottom of box), 50th (middle line), 75th (top of box), and 95th (top of upper bar) percentile scores. The dot represents the mean score. Refer to Detailed Statistics for your institution’s sample sizes.
Summary of Indicator Items
Collaborative Learning
Percentage of students who responded that they "Very often" or "Often"…
1e. Asked another student to help you understand course material
1f. Explained course material to one or more students
1g. Prepared for exams by discussing or working through course material with other students
1h. Worked with other students on course projects or assignments
Discussions with Diverse Others
Percentage of students who responded that they "Very often" or "Often" had discussions with…
8a. People from a race or ethnicity other than your own
8b. People from an economic background other than your own
8c. People with religious beliefs other than your own
8d. People with political views other than your own
48
66
64
67
%
54
56
47
54
UW-L
53
65
63
63
UW
Comprehensives
%
48
52
43
50
%
47
Carnegie
Class
55
46
51
NSSE 2013 &
2014
%
49
57
49
52
71
72
67
67
72
73
69
69
Notes: Refer to your Frequencies and Statistical Comparisons report for full distributions and significance tests. Item numbering corresponds to the survey facsimile included in your
Institutional Report and available on the NSSE Web site.
8 • NSSE 2014 ENGAGEMENT INDICATORS

45
30
15
NSSE 2014 Engagement Indicators
University of Wisconsin-La Crosse
Collaborating with others in mastering difficult material and developing interpersonal and social competence prepare students to deal with complex, unscripted problems they will encounter during and after college. Two Engagement Indicators make up this theme: Collaborative Learning and Discussions with Diverse Others.
Below are three views of your results alongside those of your comparison groups.
Mean Comparisons
Engagement Indicator
Collaborative Learning
UW-L
Mean
34.8
UW Comprehensives
Effect
Mean size
33.2
** .12
Your seniors compared with
Carnegie Class
Effect
Mean size
31.3
*** .23
NSSE 2013 & 2014
Effect
Mean size
32.4
*** .17
Discussions with Diverse Others 36.9
37.1
-.28
41.8
*** -.31
Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard deviation; Symbols on the Overview page are based on effect size and p before rounding.
Score Distributions
Collaborative Learning
60 60
Discussions with Diverse Others
45
30
15
0
Carnegie Class NSSE 2013 & 2014
0
UW-L UW
Comprehensives
UW-L UW
Comprehensives
Carnegie Class NSSE 2013 & 2014
Notes: Each box-and-whiskers chart plots the 5th (bottom of lower bar), 25th (bottom of box), 50th (middle line), 75th (top of box), and 95th (top of upper bar) percentile scores. The dot represents the mean score. Refer to Detailed Statistics for your institution’s sample sizes.
Summary of Indicator Items
Collaborative Learning
Percentage of students who responded that they "Very often" or "Often"…
1e. Asked another student to help you understand course material
1f. Explained course material to one or more students
1g. Prepared for exams by discussing or working through course material with other students
1h. Worked with other students on course projects or assignments
Discussions with Diverse Others
Percentage of students who responded that they "Very often" or "Often" had discussions with…
8a. People from a race or ethnicity other than your own
8b. People from an economic background other than your own
8c. People with religious beliefs other than your own
8d. People with political views other than your own
49
66
64
69
%
48
62
49
75
UW-L
51
66
64
68
UW
Comprehensives
%
43
61
44
70
%
38
Carnegie
Class
56
44
62
NSSE 2013 &
2014
%
40
58
46
64
73
74
69
70
73
75
70
71
Notes: Refer to your Frequencies and Statistical Comparisons report for full distributions and significance tests. Item numbering corresponds to the survey facsimile included in your
Institutional Report and available on the NSSE Web site.
NSSE 2014 ENGAGEMENT INDICATORS • 9

NSSE 2014 Engagement Indicators
University of Wisconsin-La Crosse
Students learn firsthand how experts think about and solve problems by interacting with faculty members inside and outside of instructional settings. As a result, faculty become role models, mentors, and guides for lifelong learning. In addition, effective teaching requires that faculty deliver course material and provide feedback in student-centered ways. Two Engagement Indicators investigate this theme: Student-Faculty Interaction and Effective Teaching Practices.
Below are three views of your results alongside those of your comparison groups.
Mean Comparisons
Engagement Indicator
Student-Faculty Interaction
UW-L
Mean
17.8
Your first-year students compared with
UW Comprehensives
Effect
Mean size
Carnegie Class
Mean
Effect size
NSSE 2013 & 2014
Effect
Mean size
19.9
*** -.15
20.0
*** -.15
20.3
*** -.17
Effective Teaching Practices 39.9
38.3
*** .13
40.7
-.06
40.2
-.02
Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard deviation; Symbols on the Overview page are based on effect size and p before rounding.
Score Distributions
Student-Faculty Interaction
60 60
Effective Teaching Practices
45
30
15
45
30
15
0
UW-L UW
Comprehensives
Carnegie Class NSSE 2013 & 2014
0
UW-L UW
Comprehensives
Carnegie Class NSSE 2013 & 2014
Notes: Each box-and-whiskers chart plots the 5th (bottom of lower bar), 25th (bottom of box), 50th (middle line), 75th (top of box), and 95th (top of upper bar) percentile scores. The dot represents the mean score. Refer to Detailed Statistics for your institution’s sample sizes.
Summary of Indicator Items
Student-Faculty Interaction
Percentage of students who responded that they "Very often" or "Often"…
3a. Talked about career plans with a faculty member
3b. Worked w/faculty on activities other than coursework (committees, student groups, etc.)
3c. Discussed course topics, ideas, or concepts with a faculty member outside of class
3d. Discussed your academic performance with a faculty member
Effective Teaching Practices
Percentage responding "Very much" or "Quite a bit" about how much instructors have…
5a. Clearly explained course goals and requirements
5b. Taught course sessions in an organized way
5c. Used examples or illustrations to explain difficult points
5d. Provided feedback on a draft or work in progress
5e. Provided prompt and detailed feedback on tests or completed assignments
83
85
82
65
59
15
20
17
%
27
UW-L
79
77
76
63
57
UW
Comprehensives
%
32
19
23
24
18
25
29
%
Carnegie
Class
32
81
79
77
67
64
81
79
77
65
63
19
25
29
NSSE 2013 &
2014
%
32
Notes: Refer to your Frequencies and Statistical Comparisons report for full distributions and significance tests. Item numbering corresponds to the survey facsimile included in your
Institutional Report and available on the NSSE Web site.
10 • NSSE 2014 ENGAGEMENT INDICATORS

NSSE 2014 Engagement Indicators
University of Wisconsin-La Crosse
Students learn firsthand how experts think about and solve problems by interacting with faculty members inside and outside of instructional settings. As a result, faculty become role models, mentors, and guides for lifelong learning. In addition, effective teaching requires that faculty deliver course material and provide feedback in student-centered ways. Two Engagement Indicators investigate this theme: Student-Faculty Interaction and Effective Teaching Practices.
Below are three views of your results alongside those of your comparison groups.
Mean Comparisons
Engagement Indicator
Student-Faculty Interaction
UW-L
Mean
26.1
UW Comprehensives
Effect
Mean size
24.8
* .08
Your seniors compared with
Carnegie Class
Effect
Mean size
23.2
*** .18
NSSE 2013 & 2014
Effect
Mean size
23.7
*** .15
Effective Teaching Practices 43.5
40.6
*** .23
41.5
*** .15
40.9
*** .19
Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard deviation; Symbols on the Overview page are based on effect size and p before rounding.
Score Distributions
Student-Faculty Interaction
60 60
Effective Teaching Practices
45
30
15
45
30
15
0
UW-L UW
Comprehensives
Carnegie Class NSSE 2013 & 2014
0
UW-L UW
Comprehensives
Carnegie Class NSSE 2013 & 2014
Notes: Each box-and-whiskers chart plots the 5th (bottom of lower bar), 25th (bottom of box), 50th (middle line), 75th (top of box), and 95th (top of upper bar) percentile scores. The dot represents the mean score. Refer to Detailed Statistics for your institution’s sample sizes.
Summary of Indicator Items
Student-Faculty Interaction
Percentage of students who responded that they "Very often" or "Often"…
3a. Talked about career plans with a faculty member
3b. Worked w/faculty on activities other than coursework (committees, student groups, etc.)
3c. Discussed course topics, ideas, or concepts with a faculty member outside of class
3d. Discussed your academic performance with a faculty member
Effective Teaching Practices
Percentage responding "Very much" or "Quite a bit" about how much instructors have…
5a. Clearly explained course goals and requirements
5b. Taught course sessions in an organized way
5c. Used examples or illustrations to explain difficult points
5d. Provided feedback on a draft or work in progress
5e. Provided prompt and detailed feedback on tests or completed assignments
88
90
86
69
75
30
39
29
%
50
UW-L
82
82
81
63
69
UW
Comprehensives
%
45
30
36
31
25
32
33
%
Carnegie
Class
41
83
81
79
64
69
83
81
79
62
67
26
33
33
NSSE 2013 &
2014
%
42
Notes: Refer to your Frequencies and Statistical Comparisons report for full distributions and significance tests. Item numbering corresponds to the survey facsimile included in your
Institutional Report and available on the NSSE Web site.
NSSE 2014 ENGAGEMENT INDICATORS • 11

NSSE 2014 Engagement Indicators
University of Wisconsin-La Crosse
Students benefit and are more satisfied in supportive settings that cultivate positive relationships among students, faculty, and staff. Two Engagement Indicators investigate this theme: Quality of Interactions and Supportive Environment.
Below are three views of your results alongside those of your comparison groups.
Mean Comparisons
Engagement Indicator
Quality of Interactions
UW-L
Mean
45.0
UW Comprehensives
Effect
Mean size
43.4
*** .16
Your seniors compared with
Carnegie Class
Effect
Mean size
42.8
*** .18
NSSE 2013 & 2014
Effect
Mean size
42.5
*** .21
Supportive Environment 36.5
32.7
*** .29
32.9
*** .25
33.3
*** .23
Notes: Results weighted by institution-reported sex and enrollment status (and institution size for comparison groups); *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed); Effect size: Mean difference divided by pooled standard deviation; Symbols on the Overview page are based on effect size and p before rounding.
Score Distributions
Quality of Interactions
60 60
Supportive Environment
45
30
15
45
30
15
0 0
UW-L UW
Comprehensives
Carnegie Class NSSE 2013 & 2014 UW-L UW
Comprehensives
Carnegie Class NSSE 2013 & 2014
Notes: Each box-and-whiskers chart plots the 5th (bottom of lower bar), 25th (bottom of box), 50th (middle line), 75th (top of box), and 95th (top of upper bar) percentile scores. The dot represents the mean score. Refer to Detailed Statistics for your institution’s sample sizes.
Summary of Indicator Items
Quality of Interactions
Percentage rating a 6 or 7 on a scale from 1="Poor" to 7="Excellent" their interactions with…
13a. Students
%
72
UW-L
UW
Comprehensives
%
65
%
64
Carnegie
Class
NSSE 2013 &
2014
%
64
13b. Academic advisors 49 53 53 52
67
56
52
60
45
44
61
43
43
60
42
41
13c. Faculty
13d. Student services staff (career services, student activities, housing, etc.)
13e. Other administrative staff and offices (registrar, financial aid, etc.)
Supportive Environment
Percentage responding "Very much" or "Quite a bit" about how much the institution emphasized…
14b. Providing support to help students succeed academically
14c. Using learning support services (tutoring services, writing center, etc.)
14d.
Encouraging contact among students from diff. backgrounds (soc., racial/eth., relig., etc.)
14e. Providing opportunities to be involved socially
14f. Providing support for your overall well-being (recreation, health care, counseling, etc.)
14g. Helping you manage your non-academic responsibilities (work, family, etc.)
14h. Attending campus activities and events (performing arts, athletic events, etc.)
14i. Attending events that address important social, economic, or political issues
83
74
48
77
83
37
59
54
72
65
45
69
65
29
57
44
72
67
54
64
61
33
53
45
72
67
53
66
63
32
57
46
Notes: Refer to your Frequencies and Statistical Comparisons report for full distributions and significance tests. Item numbering corresponds to the survey facsimile included in your
Institutional Report and available on the NSSE Web site.
NSSE 2014 ENGAGEMENT INDICATORS • 13