Campus Cultural Behavioral Readiness
AQIP Action Project Team
Recommendation to Executive Cabinet
September 19, 2011
AQIP Team: Campus Cultural / Behavioral Readiness
Page 1 of 8
AQIP TEAM:
On Campus Cultural / Behavioral Readiness
Final Recommendations
to the
Executive Cabinet
September 19, 2011
1
AQIP Team: Campus Cultural / Behavioral Readiness
Page 2 of 8
Recommendations: AQIP Team on Campus Cultural / Behavioral Readiness
I. Goal Statement from Team Charter:
The goal of this project is to recommend policies and processes that address
the behavioral, cultural, and socialization needs of students’ readiness in ways
that go beyond academic skill level. This project will study the behavior,
cultural expectations, and personal management skills required of students in
a college setting. The project will study ways to improve students’ ability to
meet college expectations such as how to respectfully deal with peers, faculty,
and staff. Specifically, this team will make a recommendation on ways to
integrate and/or expand our efforts to support non-academic college readiness
for MCC students.
II. Problem Statement:
Many incoming students have not acquired or yet developed the behavior,
cultural expectations, and interpersonal management skills required of
students to successfully navigate MCC’s diverse college setting. This has
resulted in an increase of incidents of negative behavior that has resulted in
discipline, public safety involvement, student complaints, behavioral
dismissals, etc. At times, MCC’s systems, and strategies for dealing with
these problems, can reinforce or contribute to these behaviors.
III. Summary of the Current Situation:
1. Current Student Behavioral Concerns – the following student behaviors
were identified as most concerning. Although organized into two categories
(i.e., ―Classroom‖ and ―Out of Classroom‖), several behavioral concerns
overlap both areas. The behaviors listed below are ranked in order of concern
by this AQIP Team.
a. In the Classroom
 Inappropriate use of technology (texting, use of laptops, head phones,
etc.)
 Disruptive behavior (arriving late, leaving early, talking out of turn, etc.)
 Language (vulgarity, sexual content, disapproving groans and sighs, etc.)
 Sense of entitlement (expecting special treatment, challenging grades,
etc.)
 Confronting faculty and/or students (in class, on campus, via e-mail)
 Student dress / attire (too sexual or inappropriate for a classroom setting)
2
AQIP Team: Campus Cultural / Behavioral Readiness
Page 3 of 8
b. Out of Classroom
 Sense of Entitlement (demanding special treatment, going to higher-ups)
 Inappropriate use of technology (e.g., talking on cell phone while being
served)
 Language (vulgarity, sexual content, disapproving groans and sighs, etc.)
 Disruptive behavior (e.g., disrespectful behaviors that slow down services)
 Stairway / hallway behavior (blocking traffic, loud behavior, etc.)
 Student dress / attire (too sexual or inappropriate for college setting)
 Disregard of campus property (e.g., trash, damaging furniture / bathrooms)
2. Specific Areas on Campus where Behavioral Concerns Occur – the
following are areas or locations where many behavioral concerns occur on
campus. These areas are ranked in order of where behavioral concerns are
most prevalent by this AQIP Team.








The Bear Bistro
Mott Memorial Building (especially Mott Middle College areas)
Classrooms
Hallways / stairways / bathrooms
Student Services offices / departments
Computer labs
Areas outside doorways (i.e., smoking areas)
Parking areas
IV. Focus Areas and Specific Recommendations:
1.
We recommend the formation of a committee to create a formal list of
“cultural values” for MCC and communicate those values to the
campus community. This committee would also assist with and
oversee a campus-wide campaign to promote civility throughout the
institution.
 The composition of committee should include members of this AQIP Team
as well as representatives from: CASD, Student Life, Registrar’s Office,
Public Safety, Faculty, Student Services staff, MMCHS, Physical Plant,
ITS, Administrative Support, and Public Information/Marketing. The
committee should also have students represented.
3
AQIP Team: Campus Cultural / Behavioral Readiness
Page 4 of 8
 As a committee or subcommittee, generate a statement and/or document
to reflect the behavioral/cultural values of Mott Community College.
Committee members may generate MCC-specific values and/or draw from
statements adopted at similar institutions. This AQIP Team generated the
following for example purposes:
o Respect for all people in the campus community – This includes
fellow students, faculty, staff, etc.
o Respect for the institution. This includes behavior that negatively
impacts Mott’s reputation and the value outside employers place on
an MCC degree.
o Respect for the learning environment and the learning process. This
includes classroom behaviors, such as not being disruptive,
appropriate use of language, being prepared, and a sense of
entitlement. It also includes respect in non-classroom settings (e.g.,
not blocking the hallways, not playing music so loudly it interrupts
what is happening in the classroom).
o Respect for physical property – This includes not damaging campus
property, college equipment, and classroom materials. It also
includes proper disposal of personal trash.
o Respect for the person attending to your needs – This includes
appropriate use of language, body language, tone, and the use of
technology when interacting with college staff in person, over the
telephone, or via e-mail.
o Respect for the process – This includes inappropriate attempts to
circumvent the established process and/or going around appropriate
decision makers.
o Respect for the fact technology use is not appropriate everywhere.
This includes awareness that what is allowable in one campus setting
(e.g., the Bear Bistro) is not acceptable in another (e.g., the
classroom). Technology use to include cell phones, iPads, head
phones, recorders, players, etc.
o Respect for rules specific to the setting you are in. – This includes
awareness that rules in one setting (e.g., a Business class taught by
a specific professor) may be very different than those in another
setting (e.g., a different Business class taught by a different
professor).
4
AQIP Team: Campus Cultural / Behavioral Readiness
Page 5 of 8
 This committee should seek avenues for formal adoption and/or approval of
the final document / statement on ―cultural values‖ (e.g., the Executive
Cabinet)
 The committee should initiate and oversee a multi-faceted marketing /
awareness campaign that utilizes multiple forms of media and technology
(e.g. print, e-mail, signage, InfoChannel, buttons). Specific forms of media
should be targeted for specific groups (e.g., students, staff, faculty) using
specific messages. This AQIP Team generated the following for example
purposes:
o Communicating cultural values document / statement to all groups on
campus. This could occur on paper documents, on bulletin boards, in
e-mails, campus televisions, on shirts or buttons, etc.
o Branding and promoting positive behavioral models This could focus
on promoting positive behaviors (e.g., what to wear to class) rather
than only focusing on negative behaviors to avoid (e.g., what not to
wear).
o Awareness of the Student Code of Conduct – This should involve
various avenues to educate students, staff and faculty regarding the
Code of Conduct (e.g., where a copy can be located, what behaviors
are not acceptable, what is the formal discipline process, etc.).
o Consequences of various behaviors – This should focus on improving
students’ awareness of the range of consequences for inappropriate
behavior (e.g., behavioral suspensions, dismissals, expulsion, a
criminal record).
o Communicating about the authority and role of Public Safety – This
should focus on better informing faculty, staff and students as to the
scope of interventions Public Safety can provide to address incivility
when it occurs.
o Specifically target dual-enrolled students and MMCHS students –
This includes efforts to specifically acclimate these unique
populations at Mott (e.g., an understanding the differences between
high school and college).
 Attached to this document is a Campus Referral Sheet developed by the
University of Utah. This new committee should develop a similar document
for use at MCC.
5
AQIP Team: Campus Cultural / Behavioral Readiness
2.
Page 6 of 8
We recommend enhancing New Student Orientation by adding a
civility/cultural values component which may necessitate extending
the time required for Orientation (e.g., increasing from three hours to
3 ½ or four hours).
 This AQIP Team generated the following components for example
purposes:
o Reviewing the cultural values document/statement/list
o Understanding the Student Code of Conduct and possible sanctions
o Understanding the role of Public Safety
o Understanding appropriate dress while on campus (e.g. contrasting
appropriate/positive examples against inappropriate/negative
examples)
o Understanding appropriate use of technology in all settings on
campus
o Understanding instructor expectations differ from professor to
professor
o Understanding appropriate ways of resolving conflicts with faculty and
staff
 In order to best communicate this information in Orientation, this new
component should utilize multi-media and interactive activities (e.g., the
use of Clickers).
 The new component should encourage the use of electronic planning,
scheduling, and communicating with others (e.g., BlackBoard, Gmail,
calendar on Gmail)
3.
We recommend institutional efforts to train and prepare faculty
regarding “how to” manage behavioral concerns that may arise in the
classroom, in the hallway, through the use of technology, etc.
 Hold regularly-scheduled professional development opportunities for faculty
to address civility issues both in and outside the classroom (e.g.
appropriate interventions, how to de-escalate conflicts, using formal
―Incident Reports‖). Such opportunities could involve faculty who are
6
AQIP Team: Campus Cultural / Behavioral Readiness
Page 7 of 8
models for communicating behavioral expectations and for addressing
behavioral concerns as they arise.
 Add a component regarding classroom civility—including a review of the
cultural values statement—into New Faculty Orientations (both full- and
part-time).
 Faculty—individually or collectively—should consider adopting civility
language into course syllabi. The following examples were provided by
MCC professors:
o “Please remember that you are in a college classroom. Any behavior
that is disruptive or disrespectful will not be tolerated. Any student
engaging in disruptive or disrespectful behavior will be asked to leave
the class, resulting in a loss of participation for that day as well.
Continued displays of disruptive and/or disrespectful behavior may
result in a conference with the dean.”
o “Please be considerate of those around you and refrain from “Jerry
Springer Show” behavior. Rude behavior that interferes with the
learning environment has no place at MCC, and we (teachers and
classmates) will expect you to abide by the MCC Student Code of
Conduct.”
 Annually revise and disseminate to faculty the Campus Referral Sheet
(mentioned in Recommendation #1) for directing students to the
appropriate department and/or employee on campus.
4.
We recommend institutional efforts to train and prepare both staff and
administration regarding “how to” manage behavioral concerns that
may arise when interacting with students—whether it be face to face
encounters or through the various forms of technology.
 Hold regularly-scheduled professional development opportunities for staff
and administration to address civility issues and behavioral concerns as
they arise (e.g. appropriate interventions, how to de-escalate conflict, how
to use Incident Reports)
 Add a component regarding campus civility—including a review of the
cultural values statement—into New Employee Orientations (both full- and
part-time).
7
AQIP Team: Campus Cultural / Behavioral Readiness
Page 8 of 8
 Annually revise and disseminate to all staff and administration the Campus
Referral Sheet (mentioned in Recommendation #1) for directing students to
the appropriate department and/or employee on campus.
5.
We recommend these “Additional Recommendations” to address
students’ cultural/behavioral readiness as well as campus incivility
issues.
 Concerns regarding MMCHS students and their impact on the overall
campus climate came up over and over during the past year. Therefore,
this AQIP Team recommends that direct involvement by the MMCHS
administration and staff is essential to addressing these behavioral
concerns at Mott Community College.
 Due to the increase in behavioral problems at MCC, many departments on
campus (Registrar’s Office, CASD, Public Safety) have redirected valuable
time and resources to address the concerns. Therefore, this AQIP Team
recommends the college explore creating a new position similar to that of a
Judicial Affairs Officer. The person / position would work closely with
various departments to address alleged violations of the Code of Conduct
(e.g., academic integrity) as well as behavioral and incivility concerns as
they occur on campus. The person / position could also be responsible for
helping promoting awareness and determining avenues for restorative
justice. This person / position could also carry out many of the
recommendations outlined in this document.
 The MCC ―Incident Report‖ form is currently used at MCC to address
behaviors that are more extreme and outside the focus of this AQIP
Project. However, this AQIP Team recommends the college develop a
similar mechanism to address acts of incivility and other lesser behavioral
concerns (e.g., the potential to utilize the Webadvisor referral system that is
part of the Retention Alert module within Datatel).
 This AQIP Project Team successfully developed and administered civility
surveys to three different groups on campus (i.e., faculty, staff and
students). This AQIP Team recommends the college use the original
survey results as ―baseline data‖ and repeat the same surveys following the
implementation of the recommendations outlined in this document (i.e.,
Fall, 2012). It is recommended that the surveys be conducted bi-annually.
8
Appendix A:
Information Collected / Solicited by this AQIP Team
1. Existing Artifacts Collected from Within MCC:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
l.
m.
MCC Student Code of Conduct
CPSC Policy on Technology
New Student Orientation Materials on Behavior
Faculty Civility Statements in Syllabi
Health Sciences Civility Policy
ITS Student Use Policy
MMC Code of Conduct
Life Skills Materials (e.g., STRIVE)
Workforce Development Intake Materials
College Success Courses at MCC
CCSSE Survey Summary (2009)
Action Project Survey Qualitative Responses (2009)
AQIP Idea Analysis Report Forms (2009, from ½ day Conversation Days)
2. MCC Stakeholders Input Sought / Received:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
Registrar’s Office
Academic Deans (Cusack)
Public Safety
Library
Athletics / Ballenger Field House
Facilities / Maintenance
Information Technology
CASD / Counselors
3. Existing Artifacts Collected from Outside MCC:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
Readiness Literature Review
Association of Student Conduct Newsletters
Behavioral Intervention Tools
Behavioral Assessment Committees (e.g., Pima CC)
Bridge/Cohort Programs
College Success Courses at MI Community Colleges
4. Surveys / Comments of Stakeholders:
a.
b.
c.
d.
Faculty Survey Quantitative / Qualitative Results (2010)
Faculty (Qualitative) Comments from Faculty Meeting (2010)
Staff Survey Quantitative / Qualitative Results (2010)
Student Survey Quantitative / Qualitative Results (2010)
9
2010 Incivility Surveys
Quantitative Review
AQIP Student Readiness - 1/19/2011

Remark Web Survey

Deployment Groups

Faculty:
11/8/2010 – 11/12/2010

Students:
12/9/2010 – 12/20/2010

Staff:
12/9/2010 – 12/22/2010
Design


Faculty:
2 question banks; 27 questions each

Students:
2 question banks; 31 questions each

Staff:*
2 question banks; 27 questions each
Respondents (705)


Faculty:
110

Students:
397

Staff:
198
Average time to complete


1
~ 12 minutes
* Faculty and Student surveys align across 87% of questions based on classroom interaction.
10
Incivility Survey
Cross-tabulation Results
Major Intersection Points
Behavior
51%
Noisily arriving late or leaving early from class
45%
42%
41%
Text messaging in class or when receiving
service from staff or student worker
Wearing clothing that is inappropriate for a
college setting
Placing or receiving cell phone calls in class or
while receiving service from staff or student
workers
Staff
%Respondents
Student
Intersection of behaviors indicated as moderately serious to very serious and
occurring on a moderately frequent to frequent basis
Faculty

l

N/A
l
l
l
N/A
N/A
l
l
l
l
36%
Disapproving gestures, groans, or sighs in class


N/A
36%
Talking out of turn in class
l
l
N/A
33%
Not disposing personal trash on campus


l
l


l

N/A
N/A







N/A
32%
31%
27%
23%
22%
22%
Using vulgarity or profanity in class or on

campus
Blocking traffic flow (e.g. hallways or stairways)
N/A
with self or personal belongings
Using a computer for tasks unrelated to course

topic in class
Treating college property without care or in a
destructive manner
Demanding special treatment or expedited
service from staff or student workers
Talking to other students about content
unrelated to the course in class
l - Subject group asked about behavior; “top 4” response in terms of severity and frequency
 - Subject group asked about behavior; responses not “top 4” in terms of severity and frequency
N/A - No respondents -subject group not asked about behavior
11
Incivility Survey - Qualitative Results
Affinity Mapping Exercise
Location
Classroom
Classroom
Classroom
Classroom
Classroom
Classroom
Classroom
Classroom
Classroom
Classroom
Classroom
Classroom
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Main Category
Faculty skills to deal with incivility
Unproductive behavior
Unproductive behavior
Unproductive behavior
Unproductive behavior
Technology usage
Technology usage
Technology usage
Sense of entitlement
Language an interruptions
Late arrival/leaving early
Confronting faculty
Dress code
Dress code
Parking
Parking
Crime
Crime
Crime
Crime
Mott Middle College High School
Mott Middle College High School
Mott Middle College High School
Hallway/stairway
Hallway/stairway
Technology usage
Technology usage
Technology usage
Technology usage
Technology usage
Sense of entitlement
Sense of entitlement
PDA/sexualized behavior
Children
Smoking
Lack of respect
Litter/trash/care of property
Sub Category
Disruptive behavior
Cheating
Sleeping in class
Talking while teacher is teaching
Use of electronic devices
Cell phone use - talking on phone
Cell phone use - texting
General
Men/baggy pants
Safety
General
Non-students/staff
Sexual harassment
Illegal drugs
Violence
Hallway
Bistro
Other
Behavior/noise
Vulgar/offensive language
General
Restroom
Bistro
Hallway
Computer labs
Immaturity
General
Bistro
Neutral
Other
Students
Faculty
8
5
2
3
5
2
6
21
6
13
9
11
2
8
7
5
7
3
2
4
9
7
10
26
18
1
Staff
3
1
1
1
1
3
1
3
5
3
4
7
4
5
3
2
6
1
1
1
1
1
9
16
7
1
1
2
7
5
2
3
4
11
10
20
19
7
291
TOTAL
2
1
3
8
21
9
6
1
2
5
2
1
1
13
65
1
9
1
1
2
12
2
1
10
2
142
8
8
3
6
11
5
11
28
10
18
12
13
8
10
11
7
7
3
3
6
11
10
27
63
34
8
1
1
4
7
6
9
8
4
6
25
13
22
42
9
498
12
AQIP Team on Student Behavioral / Cultural Readiness
Summary of the Current Situation (Step 3)
The following document summarizes the AQIP Team’s work on Step Three of the
AQIP process (“Analyze the Current Situation”). The following three areas are
addressed in this document:
1. Current Student Behavioral Concerns,
2. Specific Areas on Campus where Behavioral Concerns Occur, and
3. Potential Impact of the Behaviors of Concern at MCC
As background documentation, the following appendices are attached:
1. Appendix A: Summary of artifacts, surveys and input collected thus far
2. Appendix B: Summary of quantitative data collected & key cross-sections
3. Appendix C: Summary of qualitative analysis & categories of behaviors
1. Current Student Behavioral Concerns – based on all artifacts, surveys, and input
collected through February 2011, the following student behaviors were
identified as most concerning. Although organized into two categories (i.e.,
“Classroom” and “Out of Classroom”), several behavioral concerns overlap
both areas. The behaviors listed below are ranked in order of concern by this
AQIP Team.
a. Classroom






Inappropriate use of technology (texting, use of laptops, head phones, etc.)
Disruptive behavior (arriving late, leaving early, talking out of turn, etc.)
Language (vulgarity, sexual content, disapproving groans and sighs, etc.)
Sense of entitlement (expecting special treatment, challenging grades, etc.)
Confronting faculty and/or students (in class, on campus, via e-mail)
Student dress / attire (too sexual or inappropriate for a classroom setting)
13
b. Out of Classroom
 Sense of Entitlement (demanding special treatment, going to higher-ups)
 Inappropriate use of technology (e.g., talking on cell phone while being
served)
 Language (vulgarity, sexual content, disapproving groans and sighs, etc.)
 Disruptive behavior (e.g., disrespectful behaviors that slow down services)
 Stairway / hallway behavior (blocking traffic, loud behavior, etc.)
 Student dress / attire (too sexual or inappropriate for college setting)
 Disregard of campus property (e.g., trash, damaging furniture / bathrooms)
2. Specific Areas on Campus where Behavioral Concerns Occur – the following are
areas or locations where many behavioral concerns occur on campus. These
areas are ranked in order of where behavioral concerns are most prevalent by
this AQIP Team.








The Bear Bistro
Mott Memorial Building (especially Mott Middle College student areas)
Classrooms
Hallways / stairways / bathrooms
Student Services offices / departments
Computer labs
Areas outside doorways (i.e., smoking areas)
Parking areas
3. Potential Impact of Current Behavioral Concerns at MCC – although the actual
impact of behavioral concerns were not formally assessed, this Team notes
these behaviors could “potentially” impact MCC in the following ways (note:
these areas of potential impact are not ranked in any particular order):
a. Impact on Student Retention / Student Success
 Impede student learning outcomes in the classroom
 Decrease student retention rates (both for students acting inappropriately
and those impacted by the campus environment)
14
 Increase absenteeism by students / faculty affected by behavioral concerns
 Increase of students dropping due to behavioral suspensions / dismissals
b. Impact on Campus Environment
 Shapes a perception that inappropriate behaviors are acceptable at MCC
 Tarnish reputation of the institution on and off campus
 Foster “defensive” or “hardened” expectations of students by employees
(e.g., “self-fulfilling” expectations)
 Foster negative expectations of student behavior by employees (e.g., a
stereotype students will act inappropriately thus self-fulfilling expectations)
 Diminish employees’ / students’ sense of pride in MCC
 Diminish quality and delivery of classroom instruction
 Increase stress levels of employees / students (e.g., fear of conflict, safety)
 Diminish employee / students’ sense of security while on campus
c. Impact on College Finances







Drain on staff time (e.g., Public Safety, Registrar, Student Services)
Drain on faculty time (time to cover content, address classroom behaviors)
Loss of income from students who don’t return due to bad behaviors
Loss of community support (e.g. impact the passage of millage / bond)
Loss of business in the Bear Bistro
Cost of repairing / repainting / replacing college equipment
Cost of replacing employees (e.g., recruiting, interviewing, training, etc.)
15
Survey of Campus Incivility
November 2010
Faculty Respondents
AQIP Project Team
Cultural/Behavioral Readiness
16
Incivility Survey Development

Objectives

Assess perceptions of behavior severity

Assess perceptions of behavior frequency

Cross-tabulate perceptions of severity and frequency



Determine most frequently occurring uncivil behaviors
Generate “areas of focus” for AQIP team
Provide opportunity for written comments
17
Benchmarking

Surveys of incivility referenced




Indiana University
University of Pittsburgh
University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire
Harford Community College
18
Survey Design

Part 1 - Quantitative assessment of behavior severity (27)
Scale

Not serious
1.00
Slightly serious
2.00
Moderately serious
3.00
Very serious
4.00
Part 2 - Quantitative assessment of behavior frequency (27)
Scale

Never
1.00
Infrequent (few times a semester)
2.00
Moderately frequent (a few times a month)
3.00
Frequent (at least once a week)
4.00
Part 3 - Qualitative assessment of incivility at MCC (2)
19
Survey Deployment & Response

Remark Web Survey

Deployed 11/8/2010 – 11/12/2010

Full-time and part-time faculty invited to participate

110 respondents
 5,940 unique quantitative responses
 180 unique qualitative responses

Average time to complete
 11
min 55 sec
20
Perceived Severity – Top Four


“Very serious”
74%
Physically attacking other students in class or on campus
1.18
73%
Verbally attacking other students in class or on campus
1.17
73%
Sexually harassing others in class or on campus
1.19
71%
Making harassing comments concerning race, sexual orientation,
etc. toward other students or faculty
1.8
“Not serious at all”
56%
Eating or drinking in class
1.1
25%
Bringing children in the classroom/designated study areas
1.26
21%
Sexually harassing others in class or on campus
1.19
19%
Sending rude emails to faculty or leaving rude messages
1.14
21
Perceived Severity - Other

Flat distribution

Children in the classroom/designated study areas
22
Perceived Frequency – Top Four


“Frequent”
62%
Eating or drinking in class
40%
Text messaging in class
39%
Noisily arriving late or leaving early from class
25%
Noisily unpacking or packing backpacks/personal belongings in
class
2.1
2.12
2.4
2.21
“Never”
89%
Physically attacking other students in class or on campus
2.18
85%
Sexually harassing others in class or on campus
2.19
84%
Sending rude emails to students or leaving rude messages
2.15
69%
Sending rude emails to faculty or leaving rude messages
2.14
23
Cross-tabulation – Severity vs. Frequency
Behavior: Noisily arriving late or leaving early from class
64% of
Respondents
24
Cross-tabulation Results - Top Four

Potential Areas of Focus


Behaviors moderately serious to very serious
Behaviors moderately frequent to frequent
64% Noisily arriving late or leaving early from class
1.4 x 2.4
55% Text messaging in class
1.12 x 2.12
38% Placing or receiving cell phone calls in class
1.13 x 2.13
34% Talking out of turn in class
1.6 x 2.6
25
2010 Incivility Surveys
Quantitative Review
AQIP Student Readiness - 1/19/2011

Remark Web Survey

Deployment Groups

Faculty:
11/8/2010 – 11/12/2010

Students:
12/9/2010 – 12/20/2010

Staff:
12/9/2010 – 12/22/2010
Design


Faculty:
2 question banks; 27 questions each

Students:
2 question banks; 31 questions each

Staff:*
2 question banks; 27 questions each
Respondents (705)


Faculty:
110

Students:
397

Staff:
198
Average time to complete


1
~ 12 minutes
* Faculty and Student surveys align across 87% of questions based on classroom
26
interaction. Staff surveys are not in alignment with Faculty and Student surveys,
with the exception of a few questions common across areas of campus.
Perceived Severity – Top Four
Faculty – Student Comparison
Very Serious

Not Serious at All
Faculty
73.6%
Physically attacking other
students in class or on
campus
1.18
56.4%
Eating or drinking in class
72.7%
Verbally attacking other
students in class or on
campus
1.17
24.6%
Bringing children in the
classroom/designated study
areas
1.26
72.7%
Sexually harassing others in
class or on campus
1.19
20.9%
Sexually harassing others in
class or on campus
1.19
70.9%
Making harassing comments
concerning race, sexual
orientation, etc. toward
other students or faculty
1.8
19.1%
Sending rude emails to
faculty or leaving rude
messages
1.14
2.31*
64.9%
Eating or drinking in class
34.0%
Talking to other students
about content unrelated to
the course in class
2.20
26.7%
Using a college computer
for non-academic or
college-related purposes
2.10
19.6%
Using personal headphones
in class
2.11

1.1
Students
94.2%
Making threats against faculty,
staff, or students
93.9%
Physically attacking other
students in class or on
campus
2.18
91.7%
Sexually harassing others in
class or on campus
2,19
84.9%
Verbally attacking other
students in class or on
campus
2.17
2
2.1
* Faculty group not asked this question
27
Perceived Frequency – Top Four
Faculty – Student Comparison
Frequent

Faculty
62%
Eating or drinking in class
40%
Text messaging in class
39%
25%

Never
2.1
2.12
Noisily arriving late or leaving
early from class
2.4
Noisily unpacking or packing
backpacks/personal
belongings in class
2.21
89% Physically attacking other
students in class or on
campus
2.18
85% Sexually harassing others in
class or on campus
2.19
84% Sending rude emails to
students or leaving rude
messages
2.15
69% Sending rude emails to
faculty or leaving rude
messages
2.14
Students
64.9%
Eating or drinking in class
56.4%
Text messaging in class
41.6%
39.0%
3
Noisily arriving late or leaving
early from class
Using a college computer for
non-academic or collegerelated purposes
1.1
90.2%
Physically attacking other
students in class or on
campus
1.18
89.4%
Sending rude emails to
students or leaving rude
messages
1.15
88.9%
Sending rude emails to
faculty or leaving rude
messages
1.14
82.6%
Making threats against
faculty, staff, or students
1.12
1.4
1.10
1.31*
*Faculty group not asked this question
28
Perceived Severity & Frequency – Top Four
Staff Results

Severity
Very Serious
Not Serious at All
92.9%
Physically attacking other
students on campus
(threatening)
2.16
22.2%
Eating or drinking in nondesignated areas
2.1
92.4%
Physically attacking staff or
student workers on campus
(threatening)
2.17
14.1%
Sleeping in inappropriate
areas on campus
2.3
89.9%
Sexually harassing staff or
student workers on campus
2.19
8.1%
Using personal headphones
at disruptive levels
2.22
7.9%
Using a college computer
for non-academic or
college-related purposes
2.21
88.9%

Sexually harassing other
students on campus
2.18
Frequency
Frequent
Never
43.9%
Blocking traffic flow (e.g.
hallways or stairways) with
self or personal belongings
1.4
86.9%
Physically attacking staff or
student workers on campus
(threatening)
1.17
41.9%
Eating or drinking in nondesignated areas
1.1
82.8%
Sexually harassing staff or
student workers on campus
1.19
38.9%
Not disposing personal trash
on campus
1.2
77.3%
1.16
30.3%
Text messaging while
receiving service from staff
or student workers
Physically attacking other
students on campus
(threatening)
69.7%
Sexually harassing other
students on campus
1.18
4
1.23
29
Cross-tabulation Results - Top Four
All Survey Groups




Potential Areas of Focus

Behaviors moderately serious to very serious and

Behaviors moderately frequent to frequent
Faculty
64%
Noisily arriving late or leaving early from class
1.4 x 2.4
55%
Text messaging in class
1.12 x 2.12
38%
Placing or receiving cell phone calls in class
1.13 x 2.13
34%
Talking out of turn in class
1.6 x 2.6
Students
48%
Noisily arriving late or leaving early from class
2.4 x 1.4
45%
Text messaging in class
2.12 x 1.12
40%
Placing or receiving cell phone calls in class
2. 13 x1.13
38%
Using vulgarity or profanity in class or on campus
2.16 x 1.16
Staff
56%
Blocking traffic flow (e.g. hallways or stairways) with self or personal
belongings
44%
Placing or receiving cell phone calls while receiving service from staff or
student workers
42%
Not disposing personal trash on campus
2.2 x 1.2
42%
Wearing clothing that is inappropriate for a college setting
2.7 x 1.7
40%
Text messaging while receiving service from staff or student workers
5
2.4 x 1.4
2.24 x 1.24
2.23 x 1.23
30
Cross-tabulation Results
Major Intersection Points
Behavior
51%
Noisily arriving late or leaving early from class
45%
42%
41%
l

N/A
l
l
l
N/A
N/A
l
l
l
l
36%
Disapproving gestures, groans, or sighs in class


N/A
36%
Talking out of turn in class
l
l
N/A
33%
Not disposing personal trash on campus


l
l


l

N/A
N/A







N/A
32%
31%
27%
23%
22%
22%
6
Text messaging in class or when receiving
service from staff or student worker
Wearing clothing that is inappropriate for a
college setting
Placing or receiving cell phone calls in class or
while receiving service from staff or student
workers
Staff
%Respondents
Student
Intersection of behaviors indicated as moderately serious to very serious and
occurring on a moderately frequent to frequent basis
Faculty

Using vulgarity or profanity in class or on

campus
Blocking traffic flow (e.g. hallways or stairways)
N/A
with self or personal belongings
Using a computer for tasks unrelated to course

topic in class
Treating college property without care or in a
destructive manner
Demanding special treatment or expedited
service from staff or student workers
Talking to other students about content
unrelated to the course in class
l - Subject group asked about behavior; “top 4” response in terms of severity and frequency
 - Subject group asked about behavior; responses not “top 4” in terms of severity and frequency
N/A - No respondents -subject group not asked about behavior
31
PRELIMINARY/ROUGH COUNTS
2010 Civility Surveys (Students / Faculty / Staff)
AQIP Campus Cultural/Behavioral Readiness Action Project Team
Location
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Classroom
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Classroom
Classroom
Classroom
Outside class
Classroom
Outside class
Outside class
Classroom
Classroom
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Classroom
Classroom
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Classroom
Classroom
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Classroom
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Outside class
Main Category
Hallway/stairway
Neutral
Hallway/stairway
Technology usage
Lack of respect
Mott Middle College High School
Hallway/stairway
Language an interruptions
Late arrival/leaving early
Confronting faculty
Litter/trash/care of property
Technology usage
Parking
Mott Middle College High School
Unproductive behavior
Sense of entitlement
Dress code
Mott Middle College High School
Sense of entitlement
Other
Faculty skills to deal with incivility
Unproductive behavior
Technology usage
PDA/sexualized behavior
Parking
Crime
Technology usage
Smoking
Crime
Sense of entitlement
Unproductive behavior
Technology usage
Dress code
Technology usage
Children
Unproductive behavior
Crime
Crime
Technology usage
Technology usage
Sub Category
Behavior/noise
Vulgar/offensive language
Cell phone use - texting
Other
Bistro
Cell phone use - talking on phone
Safety
Hallway
Talking while teacher is teaching
Men/baggy pants
Bistro
General
Disruptive behavior
General
General
Non-students/staff
Computer labs
Violence
Immaturity
Sleeping in class
Use of electronic devices
General
Hallway
Cheating
Sexual harassment
Illegal drugs
Restroom
Bistro
TOTAL
64
42
35
28
26
25
22
18
16
13
13
11
11
11
10
10
10
10
9
9
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
4
3
3
3
1
1
32
Classroom Only Rough Counts
Location
Main Category
Classroom
Technology usage
Classroom
Language an interruptions
Classroom
Late arrival/leaving early
Classroom
Confronting faculty
Classroom
Technology usage
Classroom
Unproductive behavior
Classroom
Sense of entitlement
Classroom
Faculty skills to deal with incivility
Classroom
Unproductive behavior
Classroom
Unproductive behavior
Classroom
Technology usage
Classroom
Unproductive behavior
Outside Class Only Rough Counts
Location
Main Category
Outside class
Hallway/stairway
Outside class
Neutral
Outside class
Hallway/stairway
Outside class
Lack of respect
Outside class
Mott Middle College High School
Outside class
Hallway/stairway
Outside class
Litter/trash/care of property
Outside class
Parking
Outside class
Mott Middle College High School
Outside class
Dress code
Outside class
Mott Middle College High School
Outside class
Sense of entitlement
Outside class
Other
Outside class
Technology usage
Outside class
PDA/sexualized behavior
Outside class
Parking
Outside class
Crime
Outside class
Technology usage
Outside class
Smoking
Outside class
Crime
Outside class
Sense of entitlement
Outside class
Dress code
Outside class
Technology usage
Outside class
Children
Outside class
Crime
Outside class
Crime
Outside class
Technology usage
Outside class
Technology usage
Sub Category
Cell phone use - texting
Cell phone use - talking on phone
Talking while teacher is teaching
Disruptive behavior
Sleeping in class
Use of electronic devices
Cheating
Sub Category
Behavior/noise
Vulgar/offensive language
Other
Bistro
Safety
Hallway
Men/baggy pants
Bistro
General
General
General
Non-students/staff
Computer labs
Violence
Immaturity
General
Hallway
Sexual harassment
Illegal drugs
Restroom
Bistro
TOTAL
28
18
16
13
11
10
10
8
8
5
5
3
TOTAL
64
42
35
26
25
22
13
11
11
10
10
9
9
8
8
7
7
7
7
6
6
4
4
4
3
3
1
1
33
AFFINITY MAPPING ARTIFACTS/PROCESS
Date:
2011-01-12
Participants:
Brian Ivory, Clarence Jennings, Liz Connelly,
Sherry Weeder, Chris Engle, Lori Hancock,
Steve Robinson
34
The Higher Learning Commission Action Project Directory
Charles Stewart Mott Community College: Recommend improved processes for non-academic
student readiness
Project Det ails
Title
Recommend improved processes for non-academic student readiness
Category 3-Understanding Students' and Other Stakeholders' Needs
Timeline
Status REVIEWED
Updated 09-14-2010
Reviewed 10-21-2010
Planned Project Kickoff 03-24-2010
Created 03-17-2010
Target Completion 09-30-2011
Last Modified 10-21-2010
1:
Project Accomplishments and Status
A:
This Action Project was launched in the late Spring of 2010 and has only been active for a few months. The kickoff
meeting for this team took place in mid April of 2010. Despite the fact that they began work just before the end of the
academic year, members of the team have accomplished the following:
The team met 3 times over the Spring/Summer to work on its charter
The team is using the Project Charter outline found in the 2008 revision of the AQIP Action Project Guide
Productive discussions about student behavior and college expectations currently underway
Progress toward adequately describing the behavioral/cultural aspects of non-academic student success (e.g. the
team isn’t sure that “non-academic” is the proper term)
Now that we have started a new academic year, regular meetings of the team have been scheduled and work can
progress through Step 2 (define current situation) and Step 3 (analyze current situation). . In addition, MCC recently
joined the Achieving the Dream initiative, a nationwide effort to examine student success data and close achievement
gaps. MCC intends to closely align its Achieving the Dream activities with the work of its AQIP Action Projects.
R:
Charles Steward Mott Community College has chosen a very unique, yet extremely important theme for this action
project. Its work has just begun, but it is evident that AQIP Categories 3 Understanding Students' and Other Stakeholders'
Needs, 4 Valuing People, 7 Measuring Effectiveness, and 8 Planning Continuous Improvement will all be central to this
work. Because this project is only in its infancy, it is quite difficult to make a global judgment of progress. But, the first
impression seems favorable that MCC is making reasonable progress toward completion of this project and development
of an institution-wide continuous quality improvement culture. Connection to the Achieving the Dream initiative seems
most appropriate and will help staff see interconnections of this project to other such work on campus rather than an
isolated "add-on."
2:
Institution Involvement
A:
This project was suggested by employees during an extensive stakeholder input process conducted in December of 2009,
including an anonymous online survey and three half-day discussion sessions modeled on AQIP Conversation Day. Of the
45 separate table reports from the discussion sessions, 13 focused on the issue of student readiness. These “opportunity
discussions” resulted in Action Project suggestions and reflected the overwhelming increase in the number of MCC students
who are unprepared for college. In addition, an increase in the number of reports of inappropriate behavior by students
—including those involving public safety and non-academic discipline and/or dismissals—underscores the need for such a
project. Membership of this team includes:
Executive Dean of Workforce Development
Executive Dean of Student Services
Registrar
Faculty Counselor (and former President of the Faculty Association)
Occupational and transfer faculty members
35
Public Safety representative
A brief update on the team’s activities was presented during the first faculty meeting of this academic year. This team
plans to work closely with the Achieving the Dream Core and Data teams; both of these teams are made up of
representative employees in the areas of Academic Affairs and Student Services.
R:
The breadth of institutional involvement appears very appropriate. Explicit identification of team leadership would be
beneficial for subsequent reviews. With identification of a point person or team leader, accountability is more likely to
occur. MCC should be commended for it's use of the AQIP Conversation Day and online surveys in order to identify the
need for this project. Without this contextual background work, such a project would likely not have been chosen.
3:
Next Steps
A:
The immediate next step of this team is to finalize its charter and secure input and formal approval from its sponsors, the
Vice President of Academic Affairs and Vice President of Student Services. The team will then proceed with the next steps
of the 7-Step CQI process used by Action Project teams at MCC. As part of steps 2 and 3 mentioned above, the team
also plans to do the following:
Examine existing data on incidents/complaints involving inappropriate student behavior
Gather input from areas of the college that directly deal with non-academic student success outside of the
classroom
Review strategies employed by institutions with similar student populations
Examine recent literature and scholarship on the behavioral/cultural aspects of student readiness to navigate a
diverse college culture such as MCC
In addition, MCC recently joined the Achieving the Dream initiative, a nationwide effort to examine student success data
and close achievement gaps. MCC intends to closely align its Achieving the Dream activities with the work of its AQIP
Action Projects.
R:
A more explicit description of the timeline would be helpful at the point of the next review. Your use of the 7-Step CQI
process is appropriate and MCC's work will ultimately benefit from such direction. The institution may find utility in the
resources available through the Higher Learning Commission. Such resources can be found at:
www.AQIP.org/ActionProject Directory/
www.AQIP.org/InnovationExchange/
4:
Resulting Effective Practices
A:
Because the team just recently formed, few effective practices have emerged as a result of its work. One effective
practice that will result from MCC’s work on this project will be careful alignment w ith another institution-wide initiative,
Achieving the Dream. Another practice is the use of the project charter outline in the AQIP Action Project Guide, which
should save the group considerable time in the long run. Based on the feedback received from other AQIP institutions in
Michigan during the development of this project, the topic of behavioral/cultural readiness is of great interest to other
colleges. For that reason, we feel the work of this team will have great value to other institutions.
R:
While it is true that it is too early for the institution to identify resulting effective practices, it does make sense that this
action project will result in "careful alignment with another institution-wide initiative, Achieving the Dream." This certainly
will be the aim and the hope for the work of these groups. In addition, great interest from other campuses will likely be
generated in the work of MCC on "the topic of behavioral/cultural readiness." MCC should be commended for their
foresight in choosing this project.
5:
Project Challenges
A:
Once the formal charter is complete, this team is likely to face a number of challenges, some of which are not apparent at
36
the present moment. One particular challenge will be to document current orientation and non-curricular student readiness
initiatives already in place on campus. In addition, the team has discussed the fact that no external measure or
assessment tool appears to exist to determine and/or quantify this type or readiness. At this time, the team does not
foresee any specific blocks or sticking points; this is largely due to the fact that we are still at the very beginning of the
process.
R:
The MCC action project team has identified most likely challenges. Still, these challenges are not too onerous, and the
institution seems poised to be able to address them quite satisfactorily.
37