First Year Experience at San José State University
Introduction
For many years, San José State has been offering many components common to
first year experience programs. These include advising, summer bridge, orientation and
special first semester classes. A university level freshman seminar program (MUSE),
started in fall 2002 and a mandatory day and a half orientation for freshmen, started in
summer 2003, marked the start of working towards a coordinated and intentional first
year experience program. Such work continues and since 2005 has been supported by a
strategic planning goal calling for all new students (freshmen and transfers) to have a first
year experience by 2010.
This essay describes the elements of SJSU’s first year experience for new students
including the current planning efforts to better unify these elements to ensure that we are
providing new students what they need to have a very successful transition from high
school or community college into the university and to have a strong foundation for
earning their university degree and getting the most out of their college education.
Vision 2010
To help accomplish the strategic planning FYE goal, a FYE Advisory Panel
(comprised of a cross section of students, administrators, faculty, and staff) was
established in spring 2006. The FYE panel proposed a plan to implement by 2010 a
universal, mandatory, first year experience for freshman and transfer students. The plan
is grounded in the learning and belonging model initially proposed by the SJSU Greater
Expectations Team that attended the AAC&U Institute in Burlington, VT in June 2005.
In this model learning and belonging begins in the first year of college as students
become oriented to a new set of experiences and expectations for academic and
university life; they gain an understanding for the rich history and quality of the
institution; and they become more focused on becoming educated and engaged persons in
the academic, cultural, and social fabric of SJSU and the greater community. The
recommendations incorporate the 22 points provided by the Chancellor of the California
State University system in that the freshmen student experience is incorporated into the
degree program as coursework leading to the degree (general education or major credit).
“First year” refers to first time freshman and transfer students (from community
colleges and other four-year institutions). Although the needs and transitions of freshman
and transfers may overlap, recognizing their uniqueness and diverse experience requires
that they are served differently.
The proposed overall goals for the first year experience are for all students:
 To establish a strong foundation for becoming a university level student and
scholar (Learning)
 To become acclimated to both the intellectual and social activities of university
life (Belonging)
1
We define university scholar as someone who:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Has learning and social interaction skills
Has knowledge for lifelong learning and living
Uses cognitive processes
Takes responsibility as an engaged person in various roles: student, learner,
professional, and global citizen.
The above list of knowledge, skills and abilities was originally developed for the
MUSE/University Scholar Rubric that has been applied in MUSE (Metropolitan
University Scholar’s Experience) seminars since 2002. Discussion of the rubric in the
Educated Person Dialogue and the Integrative Learning Planning Panel led to a redesign
of the University Scholar Rubric, including how to score and utilize it, and how to
technically deliver the University Scholar Rubric in the context of an electronic portfolio.
This rubric will be sued to develop student learning objectives. These learning objectives
will be designed to assess the content and activities of the proposed experiences in
meeting these stated learning objectives and to help students to understand why they are
in college and what they are and should be gaining from the experience.
Admitted Student Reception
A university FYE begins the moment a potential student completes an application
to SJSU. The induction of first time freshmen and transfer students into the first year at
SJSU begins with an Admitted Student Reception to which students and their families are
invited in multiple ways: via e-mail invitation, US mail postcard in December, a flyer
contained in the admitted student packet, flash mail, and direct phone calls by members
of Greek organizations. Since 2005, SJSU has held one reception in Southern California
and another on-campus. For these events, admitted students and their families are
provided an opportunity to interact with students, staff, and faculty from SJSU. They can
learn more about the campus, and the learning and belonging opportunities it provides.
At this point of contact, students are still unsure about SJSU and the decision making
phase of their transition is ongoing. Faculty, staff, and student contact is critical in
securing that SJSU is strongly considered in this decision.
In spring 2004, 877 admitted students and 1275 guests registered for the Northern
California Admitted Student Reception. In addition, 69 admitted students and 88 guests
registered on site on the day of the event. Of those attending, 77 students submitted their
Intent to Enroll form. The day included housing tours with approximately 400 students
and their families, distribution of 200 housing applications, and 35 students signed
housing contracts. The day included information about the Career Center SpartaJOBS
for on-campus employment, demonstrations by Martin Luther King Jr. Library staff, and
panel discussions about academic programs and enrollment information (it was estimated
that over 200 attended these panel discussions).
Among survey items about the event, approximately 92% of those responding
found that the SJSU Admitted Student Reception provided information and accurate
answers to their questions and 93% said the event shaped/impacted their image of SJSU
2
favorably to attend in the fall semester. Qualitative comments were collected and
categorized by positive compliments of the program and areas for improvement.
Generally those responding found a “hospitable” and welcoming campus and a faculty
and staff who were “very friendly”. Specific opportunities for improvement included the
“parking arrangements”, “the length with which people had to plan to attend the event”,
and the need for “better representation of faculty”. Results from the survey of the
attendee (collapsed across students and their family members) perceptions regarding the
Admitted Student Receptions in spring 2004 and spring 2005 are provided in Table 1.
In spring 2005 two Admitted Student Receptions were held, in Southern
California and Northern California (on-campus). The Southern California Admitted
Student Reception drew 50 admitted students and 63 guests. The 41 respondents to a
survey responded good, very good, and excellent with regard to the opening remarks, the
SJSU overview, and the speakers with regard to program and event activities. Of those
attending 93% said the event shaped or impacted their image of SJSU favorably to attend
the fall semester. In Northern California 1039 admitted students and 1280 guests
attended. Intent to Enroll forms were submitted by 33 students. The pre-registration was
for 1424 admitted students and 2230 guests, a show rate of approximately 73%. In an
attempt to assess the day through an on-line evaluation only 27 surveys were returned
with generally favorable ratings of the program for the day.
In the spring 2006, two Admitted Student Receptions were held. These events
yielded greater numbers than 2005 and 2004 with 175 students and 255 parents
(Ntotal=430) attending the event in Southern California and 1924 students and 3386
parents (Ntotal=5310) attending the event in Northern California. These are preliminary
data. Survey results are currently being analyzed.
Freshman Orientation
[http://www.sjsu.edu/orientation/]
A significant collaboration between the Division of Student Affairs (specifically
Student Involvement) and the Division of Academic Affairs (specifically Enrollment and
Academic Services, Student Advising Center) made possible the implementation of a
mandatory freshman orientation program in the summer of 2003 that has since grown and
evolved. Approximately 98 percent of freshmen attend one of nine scheduled two-day
orientations held throughout the summer (June, July and August). The Freshman
Orientation program met the directives/recommendations of New Student Task Force,
Orientation Advisory Team, Provost, and Vice President for Student Affairs. The
experience provides a seamless and welcoming program for new students. Assessment
data indicates that it also enhances first impressions/contacts with university for students,
parents, and families. The orientation program receives enthusiastic participation from
faculty/staff and it is stronger and more stable because of mandatory status. Further, the
program provides enhanced leadership experience for student staff. The freshman
orientation program represents a ground breaking collaboration and coordination among
departments and divisions that provide services to new students. Evaluation of the
freshman orientation program in 2003 consisted of formal program evaluations,
discussion groups, written comments, and debriefing meeting notes. Data were collected
3
in a variety of forms and from many people, including: students, parents, orientation
staff, SJSU faculty and staff, and program coordinators.
The quantitative data are represented in Table 2 indicating a fairly good rating
among all items queried. Qualitative responses included that there needed to be more
representation from key offices such as Financial Aid, Admissions, and the Testing
Office; more time is needed to work on class schedules and to ask questions. The
respondents were complimentary of the good orientation staff and that they were fun, but
that more freedom and more time to independently roam the campus as well as more
breaks are needed.
Welcome Convocation
The day prior to the opening of the fall semester, SJSU holds a Welcome
Convocation during which the President, Provost, Vice Presidents, Associated Student
President, alumni, faculty, and staff welcome new students and their families to the
campus. Faculty gather around coffee and bagels in the early morning and then march
into the event in academic regalia. The Welcome Convocation has grown and evolved in
the last several years. In the fall of 2004, the Welcome Convocation was moved to Caret
Plaza in front of the new Martin Luther King Jr. Library. The Welcome Convocation
kicks off a variety of Welcome Week activities designed to engage new students on
campus and continue to invest them in our traditions. On the day of the convocation
students and families participate in activities, including: PlayFair for students; campus
tours for parents and families; and, the President’s BBQ on Tower Lawn for students and
their families, as well as employees. These events have served the University community
in an attempt to achieve a sense of belonging for new students, their families, as well as
administrators, faculty, and staff. Satisfaction data on the Welcome Convocation and
Welcome Week activities will be collected beginning fall 2006.
Residence Life - FROSH Start Program
FROSH Start is a program of activities for students to become familiar and
comfortable with the campus and community one week prior to the start of the fall
semester, sponsored by Residential Life. Systematic qualitative data collection in the fall
2005 revealed that the FROSH Start Program was effective in providing students with
information about campus resources and the San Jose community; assisting students in
meeting other residents and developing friendships, teaching students time management
strategies; educating students about the diversity of the SJSU student population and
living in a multicultural society. Areas for improvement included: increase faculty
involvement and strengthen connection to academic components of the university.
These findings yielded the following actions and changes to the FROSH Start
Program: increase faculty involvement in the planning and implementation of the
FROSH Start Program; add more academic related sessions. In fall 2006, students
participating in the FROSH Start Program will be assessed, utilizing indirect and direct
methodology, to determine their understanding of: SJSU campus resources and the San
4
Jose community; time management strategies and how to achieve a balance between
school, work, and leisure; Career Center services and how to locate part time jobs;
multicultural competencies and cultural sensitivity; how to locate classes and buy books.
In spring 2007, the program will be assessed on how students: clarify their values and
develop a stronger sense of identity; improvements to verbal communication skills.
Academic Programs
SJSU offers several freshman transition courses, including: MUSE, college
specific classes (Science 002, Engineering 8 and 10, and Business 10), Humanities
Honors, and ASPIRE (serves the needs of low income, first generation college students,
where neither parent has a four-year degree from a U.S. institution, and/or those that have
a learning or physical disability. To receive ASPIRE Program services, students must
meet federal guideline requirements, and they must also demonstrate a need for the
services).
A. The Metropolitan University Scholar’s Experience (MUSE)
[http://www.sjsu.edu/muse/]
MUSE is a university-wide program that includes seminar style, 3-unit courses
designed by individual faculty. MUSE seminars meet the objectives of core general
education (GE) in one of six GE areas (B1, B2, C1, C2, D1, and E). MUSE seminars
provide focus on disciplinary content as well as process skills often found in first year
experiences (study skills, note taking, time management) to assist freshman with their
transitions from high school to college. In addition to the seminar, the MUSE program
includes a full workshop schedule for students to develop a sense of belonging and that
focuses them on academic and social transitions as well as physical well-being.
Attendance at two or more workshops is a requirement for all MUSE seminar
participants. The MUSE goals are for students: 1) to lay the foundation to understand
what it means to be a university scholar, and 2) to become engaged in the intellectual and
social activities of our metropolitan university.
The MUSE Program is housed in the Office of Undergraduate Studies. The FTEF
for the program have either been fully or partially paid by the Provost’s Office. The
FTES are allocated to the home departments of the faculty teaching in the program.
MUSE seminars and faculty. The data presented in Table 3 reveal the breadth
and variety of coursework offered through the MUSE Program since its inception in fall
2002. Opting to teach a MUSE seminar allows a faculty member to engage students in
scholarly materials and disciplinary approaches. Over a period of five years the MUSE
faculty have represented 47 departments, and 12 administrative and student affairs
departments that are listed in Table 4. They represent all Colleges of the University, as is
found by viewing Table 5. These faculty are from among all ranks of professor, lecturer,
and administrative and student affairs professional. A master’s degree is required.
The Associate Dean for First Year Experience maintains close electronic contact
with MUSE faculty throughout the year through broadcast e-mails and print
5
communications. Each year, faculty proposing new MUSE seminars must attend an all
day January workshop. Returning faculty participate in the workshop too. The learning
objectives designed for the MUSE workshop are for faculty: to understand the goals of
MUSE and how to achieve them; to gain knowledge of the components, guidelines, and
requirements of MUSE; to create a sense of community and relationships with faculty
across disciplines; to gain knowledge of active learning strategies and how to implement
them; to develop an understanding of the various resources on campus to assist students;
and develop an awareness of what to expect when teaching a MUSE seminar. As can be
observed in Table 6, of 18 respondents who completed the workshop evaluation in
January 2004, the majority responded positively about the workshop. Faculty “agreed”
or “strongly agreed” most of the time that they met the learning objectives of the
workshop. These quantitative data are supported by the qualitative comments made by
the faculty that the workshop helped them: “identify resources to go forward”; “clarify
my thoughts”, “appreciate the feedback sessions” from the peer mentors and returning
faculty. Faculty respondents also commented that the day was too long and the quantity
of information was too much to cover in one day.
Each spring in cooperation with the Division for Student Affairs the MUSE
Program sponsors a campus tour for faculty to understand the co-curricular options on
campus and to enable faculty to provide a sense of belonging for students. Also, in
cooperation with the Center for Faculty Development and Support the MUSE Program
has sponsored hour long workshops to assist faculty in their work, e.g., fall 2006
assistance with new Smart Classrooms in Clark Hall, in the Academic Success Center.
SJSU has sponsored several teleconferences in the Instructional Resource Center on
understanding different aspects of the first-year student and their families. The MUSE
website (http://www.sjsu.edu/muse/) constantly evolves with new information for faculty,
and students and their families to understand the program and its strong connections to
resources for first year learning and belonging.
A qualitative study conducted by A. Raggio (SJSU Master’s thesis, completed
August 2004) provided insight and indicated many important findings related to faculty
attitudes about teaching in the MUSE program. The concerns identified among the
faculty included extra workload incurred by teaching a MUSE seminar that might
continue for several years as the MUSE faculty member becomes a mentor for students
throughout their college experiences; the sometimes negative attitudes of departments
and colleges regarding the MUSE program in general(such as due to FTES concerns); the
role of MUSE in the professor’s own retention, tenure, and promotion process; the
increased requirements placed on faculty when teaching a general education course and
participating in a MUSE Peer Review. Benefits of the program included: getting to meet
great first year students; working across departmental and college boundaries; learning
more about campus resources; having the opportunity to work with colleagues across
campus; and participating in MUSE workshops and social events. Further, faculty
remarked that teaching a MUSE seminar provided an opportunity to teach specialized and
alternative topics in an era of fewer academic course offerings.
6
All MUSE faculty are required to participate in a peer review of their seminars.
This occurs throughout the spring semester. MUSE seminars, new and returning, are
reviewed each year by peers who are assigned to a group by GE Area. Peer Review
Groups are purposefully composed of new and returning MUSE faculty. Peer Review
Groups meet each spring prior to the offering of the seminar the following fall. The Peer
Review Group assesses the quality of the seminar and faculty collaborate to discuss
activities and share ideas for meeting the MUSE and general education learning
objectives. In spring 2006 a second review by an alternate Peer Review Group with
feedback for revisions was implemented.
According to Academic Senate Policy (http://www.sjsu.edu/senate/S04-2.htm) a
MUSE seminar shall “be assessed prior to the fourth time it is taught. The Assessment
Packet will be similar to the assessment coordinator’s summary for regular GE courses.
Revisions based on the assessment should be incorporated into the course during its
fourth offering”. Fourteen MUSE seminars have been assessed by the Board of General
Studies (BoGS): thirteen received three year continuing certification; one was not
approved for continuing certification. Provided in Table 7 are the percentages of students
that faculty reported to have met the general education and MUSE learning objectives,
and as submitted to the Board of General Studies. Table 8 is a representation of these
same data resorted by general education area and collapsed across two years of MUSE
seminar assessment to add more variability in each general education category. The
majority of seminars offered across the length of the program and more than three times
represent general education areas D1 and E. The data indicate a high rate of meeting the
general education and MUSE learning objectives. Only one Area B1 and one Area C2
course have been assessed so far and therefore these data will not be discussed in the
context of any other data, i.e., it is unknown whether any trends are due to individual
differences among faculty members and the classes they teach rather than an artifact of
teaching a MUSE seminar in a particular general education area.
When collapsed across four MUSE seminars in general education area D1 the
faculty members reported that a higher percentage of students accomplished learning
objective L05 and MUSE LO1 and MUSE LO2 than L01, L03, and LO2 and LO4. The
range of percentages reported were 83%-93%, indicating strong achievement of the
objectives. Close inspection of the raw data in Table 8 reveals achievement of the
objectives for all D1 courses.
For general education Area E the faculty across eight courses reported that at least
88% of the students achieved the Area E general education and MUSE objectives. The
faculty in general education area E reported that students achieved Learning Objective
(LO) 3 more of the time than all other learning objectives including the MUSE
objectives.
MUSE Students. In Table 9 the data representing the number of seminars
offered, the total number of students enrolled in MUSE seminars for a given freshman
cohort, the average class size, and median class size across 5 years are provided. Since
7
its inception in 2002, approximately 1/3 of the freshman class has enrolled in the MUSE
program.
With the present dataset short-term trends can be observed. For example, the
trend in retention for the fall 2003 cohort in fall 2004 was 82% for those who took a
MUSE seminar in the first semester and 80% for those who did not take MUSE in their
first semester. Disaggregated by ethnicity, the data reveal that fewer African American
students dropped out in fall 2004 if they took a MUSE seminar in fall 2003 (92%
retention from year 1 to year 2) than if they did not (72% retention from year 1 to year 2).
Though when disaggregated by ethnicity the frequency of students in these cells is small,
these trends may be further investigated.
The NSSE results for the spring 2006 were disaggregated among freshman
respondents by MUSE and no MUSE. The data indicate that students who took a MUSE
course were somewhat more engaged (based on the NSSE criteria) than students who did
not take a MUSE class. The majority of first year students who completed the NSSE
instrument in spring 2006 reported that they “sometimes” asked questions in class.
MUSE students responded that they “sometimes” asked questions more than non-MUSE
students where non-MUSE students reported more that they “often” asked questions in
class, as can be found in the Table 10. The results of the NSSE revealed interesting
findings with regard to the item “prepare two or more drafts of a paper or assignment
before turning it in”. Non-MUSE students reported that they “never” submitted “two or
more drafts of a paper” 19% of the time whereas MUSE students reported that they
“never” submitted “two or more drafts of a paper” 15% of the time. On the other hand
more MUSE students reported that they “often” “prepare two or more drafts of a paper or
assignment before turning it in”. These data are presented in Table 11. Further, the
NSSE results for the item “made class presentations” revealed that MUSE students
reported in greater percentages that they “often” “made class presentations” than nonMUSE students, whereas fewer MUSE students reported that they “never” made a “class
presentation” than non-MUSE students. These results are presented in Table 12.
A study of the MUSE effect on the pass rate for LLD (remedial English) was
conducted. As illustrated in Table 13, the pass rate for LLD is greater for those who took
MUSE than those who did not take MUSE. The overall main effect of MUSE is
significant and when disaggregated by year, 2002 students passed at a significantly
greater rate than LLD only students.
MUSE Workshops. A varied and broad range of MUSE workshops are
scheduled from August through December for MUSE students and faculty to attend
(http://misweb.cob.sjsu.edu/muse2005/calendar.htm). Workshop topics focus on
academic and social support, and physical well being. The Campus Reading Program
provides additional opportunities for students to engage in discussion groups and
workshops (http://www.sjsu.edu/reading/index.htm). Positive qualitative responses from
students attending MUSE workshops in fall 2004 were the following: “well organized”,
“I loved it”, “great topic and lots of key info”, “really helped me gain some confidence
and feel more secure with college life”, “delightful speaker”, “I learned a bit about
myself”, this workshop “helps to inform students of the importance of plagiarism”. Other
8
comments that require changes to the workshop schedule include: “it will be better if
time is earlier”, “more interaction”, “bigger room”, “make sure equipment works before”
workshop, “don’t talk so fast and go through slides in a second”.
Through the MUSE workshop schedule, students have had the change to interact
with administrative and student leadership on campus. For example in addition to the
Welcome Convocation and President’s picnic to open the fall semester, the President and
Provost invited MUSE and Science 2 students as well as Peer Mentors to a reception and
discussion at the President’s house in spring 2006. Another event is scheduled for fall
2006.
Peer Mentor Program. The Peer Mentor Program was implemented in sync with
MUSE in the fall 2002. Peer Mentors are upper division students who work for three
hours in the MUSE seminar class with a faculty member for an entire semester, and in the
Peer Mentor Center. SJSU appears to be unique in that Peer Mentors work in both a
center and in the classroom. From fall 2002 to spring 2006 the program supported
approximately 25 Peer Mentors. In fall 2006, the Peer Mentor Program had grown to
approximately 40 Peer Mentors. In fall 2006, the Peer Mentor Center moved to a more
central location, the Academic Success Center in Clark Hall, to provide students with
academic and social support, and to meet the transitional needs of first year students. The
Center is now right next to the classrooms where the MUSE seminars are taught.
Presented in Table 14 are the frequencies and percents of students in MUSE
seminars that responded to the item “working with a Peer Mentor helped me to succeed
in my first semester. More than 50% of the students either agreed or disagreed that
working with a Peer Mentor helped them succeed in their first semester. Approximately
7% disagreed with the statement. Forty percent of the students chose the neutral
response.
Examples of student achievements from the Peer Mentor Program show how
students can vertically integrate by connecting with academic and co-curricular aspects of
the university. These students were vertically integrated into SJSU through their
engagement in MUSE, a special cohort of the Humanities Honors sequence, and
participation as student leaders in programs such as the Peer Mentor Program. Upon the
completion of their Bachelor of Arts degrees, these students have been accepted to
graduate programs to pursue their doctorates (e.g., Brown University, Rutgers University,
University of Pennsylvania, and University of California, Irvine) they have studied
internationally (e.g., in Australia and England), and they find successful careers in Silicon
Valley and around the globe (e.g., Adobe and Merrill Lynch). These Peer Mentors have
received multiple scholarships and honors, e.g., departmental scholarships, Dean’s
scholarships, PFLAG scholarship, EOP Awards, Resident of the Year, AS 55 Leadership
Award. Further, these students have served the university on multiple committees: e.g.,
first year experience panel, SJSU Black Student Union, CSU Civic Learning Institute
June 2006, WASC Committee, Greater Expectations Institute June 2006 to name a few.
B. Humanities Honors Cohort
[http://www.sjsu.edu/hum/honors/humhonors/]
9
The Humanities Honors Program has been in existence for over 25 years to serve
new students. It consists of a 2-year learning community that integrates 24 units of
coursework across four semesters. This integrative approach to the core general education
curriculum satisfies a minimum of 30 units of credit or a maximum of 36 units of credit
depending on the major, i.e., College of Engineering =36 units of credit; all other
colleges=30 units of credit. To participate in the Humanities Honors Program students
must enter with a 580 verbal score on the SAT. For those students who entered
Humanities Honors as first time freshman in fall 1999 (N=83) they completed their four
semester sequence in spring 2001. Using a random sample of 20 of 83 students to
represent the cohort, 17 of 20 (85%) graduated within six years (at or before spring 2005
graduation). One student filed for spring 2006 graduation; two were discontinued.
Special Cohort of Humanities Honors. In spring 2003 a special cohort of
Humanities Honors was started with students recruited from MUSE seminars and other
FYE courses (Science 2, LLD). A qualitative assessment of this special Humanities
Honors cohort was conducted in May 2005. Students were queried about whether they
had a MUSE seminar or not; whether courses or activities impacted them; what SJSU
could do to help them succeed in the university; and how did Humanities Honors and/or
MUSE shape their approach to the college experience? After a paper and pencil survey
33 responses were received.
When asked if they participated in classes during their first semester at SJSU that
have been useful for them in Humanities Honors many students referred to their
experiences in MUSE seminars, e.g., “ I participated in MUSE XX. This class was eye
opening and meaningful to me on a personal level. My teacher taught me to be open to
narrow mindedness of other people or else I will be limited in my understanding of the
world”. Another student reported that his or her “MUSE class helped [me] immensely.
It really provided a good environment to help freshmen get acquainted with the college
experience”. While another student wrote: “the Peer Mentors are great”. Finally,
another student wrote “in my MUSE class my teacher taught us the difference between
valid research materials and invalid research materials. She taught us how to research
papers and use scholarly journals”.
When these same students were asked about Humanities Honors and/or MUSE
shaping their approach to their college experience the following responses were noted:
”I see these courses as playing a significant role in shaping a more open-mined outlook
on the universe”; “Humanities helped me make friends, have close relationships with
professors, and gain a broad foundation of knowledge about early civilizations”;
“Humanities program… made me want to pursue my education in greater depth”;
“Humanities Honors made me take school seriously”; “Humanities Honors and MUSE
have influenced my approach to college in the respect that it provides me with a catalyst
to help fuel my drive to succeed in college”.
Using a random sample of 19 of 56 students in this special cohort of Humanities
Honors students, it was found that 5 of 18 (26%) had graduated within four years (at or
before spring 2006 graduation). Also 13 of 18 had completed more than 100 units; three
10
were discontinued. The remaining four had earned from 46 to 90 units by the end of
spring 2006. Most of these students were not eligible for the Humanities Honors
Program when they arrived at SJSU due to non-qualifying EPT score. Nonetheless, they
completed the program, and the great majority of them are on the track to graduate within
six years (based on units earned through spring 2006).
C. Science 2
[http://www.science.sjsu.edu/science2/index.php]
Science 002, Success in Science, is focused on improving the GPAs and retention
rates of Science majors at SJSU. Science 2 was developed to help freshmen in the
College of Science realistically understand what it takes to succeed in science; helping
them to develop study skills, and orienting them to university life. When examining
retention across three separate class cohorts, those who took Science 002 were retained at
a higher level than those who did not take Science 002; and specifically, the retention of
the 1999 cohort across 7 semesters indicates that those who had Science 002 were
retained at a higher rate in the College of Science than those who did not have Science
002.
D. Engineering 8 and Engineering 10
Beginning in fall 2006 the College of Engineering will offer incoming students a
living and learning community in the university dormitory. Students enrolled in
Engineering 8 or Engineering 10 will have the option to live on an engineering floor in
the Housing Village and to participate in activities designed specifically for them.
The results of a survey implemented at the end of fall 2005, collapsed across three
sections of Engineering 8 (N=76 students), can be observed in Tables 15 and 16. Close
inspection of the data reveals that more than 75% of student respondents reported that the
program was good or excellent.
In a publication in the 32nd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
proceedings, Mourtos and Furman reported improved attitudes regarding Engineering 10
after students took the course in fall 2002 than before they took it. These results are
summarized in Table 17.
Campus Reading Program
[http://www.sjsu.edu/reading]
The Campus Reading Program began in 2005 to help build a culture of reading
and strengthen community at SJSU. The Campus Reading Program involves the members
of our campus - students and employees, reading the same book. The SJSU Campus
Reading Program is sponsored by the Undergraduate Studies Office and the Division of
Student Affairs. A book is selected each year that students, faculty and staff are
encouraged to read during the summer. Then at the start of the fall semester, readers
engage in critique and analysis of the book in small discussion groups.
11
New students are introduced to the program starting at the Admitted Student
Reception. Orientation leaders are given the book and encouraged to talk to students
about it. In fall 2006, the President’s Office gave each freshman student a copy of the
2006 book – The Kite Runner, at Orientation along with a letter from the President
welcoming them to the campus, encouraging to get involved in campus activities (such as
the reading program), why he liked the book (the main character goes to SJSU) and
asking them to view reading it as a first assignment.
Many professors, including those teaching MUSE classes, include the campus
book in their courses. There are many discussion groups and other activities offered for
students and employees throughout the fall and spring semesters, including a theater arts
production so that students have an opportunity to see how prose fiction and drama differ
in telling the same story. A student essay contest on The Kite Runner in fall 2006 yielded
a first place winner who wrote her essay for an assignment in her MUSE class. A survey
of freshmen students was conducted at the end of the fall 2006 semester to gather
information for the program as it continues to grow and develop.
[http://www.sjsu.edu/reading/survey]
Special Assessment Project
In fall 2006, San José State University (SJSU) started participating as one of 18
institutions in the National Longitudinal Study of Liberal Arts Education directed by The
Center for Inquiry in the Liberal Arts at Wabash College, and co-directed with the
University of Michigan, the Miami University of Ohio, and the University of Iowa. The
study is receiving large scale support from the Lily Foundation. Freshmen students from
the entering class of 2006 will be surveyed several times across four or more years
through quantitative (surveys) and qualitative (in-person interviews) methods. By
participating, San José State University will be given an opportunity to longitudinally
assess our own institution in a managed and coordinated dataset, and to have our
institutional data be represented in the larger national context regarding higher education.
12
FYE Data
Table 1. Quantitative findings from the satisfaction survey of students and their families
about the Admitted Student Reception, spring 2004 and spring 2005. (Responses on the
scale were based on the following rating system: 1=needs improvement, 2=fair, 3= good,
4=very good, 5=excellent).
Question
Information about the event (online)
Contacting SJSU regarding
questions
On-line registration
Registration e-mail confirmation
Informed in enough time
Directions to the event
Parking availability
Check-in
Welcome remarks
Opening remarks
Academic open house
Panel Discussion
Refreshments/lunch
Campus services
Campus tours
Interaction with faculty, staff,
students
Quality of the program
Program and event virtual tour
SJSU overview
Speakers
Breakout sessions
Lunch entertainment
Northern
California Spring
2004
N Mean
SD
240
3.87 1.13
Southern
California
Spring 2005
N Mean
SD
41
4.02 1.04
Northern
California
Spring 2005
N Mean
SD
26
3.88
.86
207
3.84
1.15
36
3.86
1.07
23
3.57
.99
236
234
237
228
219
235
230
228
231
185
197
211
152
226
4.34
4.29
3.89
4.20
4.05
4.26
4.25
4.29
3.93
3.98
4.15
4.13
3.99
4.13
.98
1.10
1.30
1.00
1.28
.91
.95
.91
1.14
.96
1.02
.93
1.09
1.02
41
40
39
38
40
41
40
40
-
4.41
4.23
4.26
3.47
4.28
4.66
4.45
4.33
-
.81
1.05
1.02
1.20
.91
.58
.75
.76
-
25
26
27
25
23
26
25
24
24
20
24
22
21
23
4.12
4.31
4.30
3.88
4.04
3.58
3.48
3.42
3.29
3.45
4.25
3.82
3.29
3.83
.73
.79
.99
1.20
1.26
1.30
1.16
1.25
1.30
1.19
.9
.73
1.52
.94
235
-
4.16
-
.94
-
32
38
41
40
-
4.09
4.39
4.32
4.35
-
.89
.76
.72
.70
-
24
24
19
-
3.79
3.54
3.84
.93
1.06
.76
13
Table 2. Represented are the mean ratings from participants who responded (N=1439
respondents) from the summer 2003 freshman orientation program (1=Poor 2=Fair
3=Neutral 4= Good 5= Excellent).
Item
Check In
On Campus Business
Resource Faire
Lunch
Opening Session
Group Meeting 1 (students)
Group Meeting 2 (parents)
Group Meeting 2 (students)
Group Meeting 2 (parents)
Preliminary Advising Session
Special Interest Sessions
Educational Opportunity Program
Expand Your Horizons through Study Abroad
Experience College Life through Your Associated
Students
Getting Involved in Your Community
Got Greek? Fraternity and Sorority Life at SJSU
Money Management and Dangers of Credit Cards
Diversity Resources
University Library – Your Key to Academic Success
A Sneak Peek (MUSE and Humanities Honors Faculty)
Group Meeting 3 (students)
Group Meeting 3 (parents)
Group Meeting 4 (students)
Advising and Registration
Overall Impressions (Student Orientation Staff)
Overall Impressions (Orientation Program)
14
Mean Rating
3.93
3.73
3.62
3.37
3.69
3.93
3.80
3.77
3.67
3.70
3.70
3.69
3.79
3.67
3.64
3.58
3.74
4.06
3.79
4.18
3.92
4.14
4.02
4.52
3.96
Table 3. MUSE seminars by general education area and academic year.
MUSE Seminars by
GE Area
Physical Science
Life Science
Humanities/Arts
Humanities/Letters
Social Science/
Human
Behavior
Comparative Systems,
Cultures, &
Environments
Social Issues
Human Understanding
& Development
TOTAL
2002
Offered
2003
Offered
2004
Offered
2005
Offered
2006
Proposed
6
5
3
18
15
5
4
2
13
16
3
4
3
11
15
1
5
4
8
21
3
3
5
6
23
6
-*
-
-
-
13
21
1
20
13
16
18
87
61
49
55
58
*
According to MUSE Policy (Academic Senate Policy), MUSE seminars can no longer satisfy General
Education objectives in Areas D2 or D3.
15
Table 4. Represented are the home Departments of faculty teaching MUSE seminars
from 2002-2006.
Academic Department Affiliations
Accounting and Finance
Anthropology
Art & Design
Aviation and Technology
Biological Sciences
Chemical Engineering
Chemistry
Child Development
Civil Engineering
Communication Studies
Comparative Religious Studies
Computer Engineering
Communicative Disorders
Counselor Education
Dance
Economics
Electrical Engineering
Elementary Education
English
General Engineering
Geography
Geology
Health Science
Hospitality Management
Humanities
Journalism and Mass
Communication
Justice Studies
Kinesiology
Linguistics and Language
Development
Management Information Systems
Marketing
Math
Mechanical and Aerospace
Engineering
Mexican American Studies
Music
Nursing
Nutrition and Food Sciences
Occupational Therapy
Philosophy
Physics
Political Science
Psychology
Recreation and Leisure Studies
Secondary Education
Social Work
Sociology
Television, Radio, & Film
Administrative and Student Affairs Departments
Student Life and Leadership (now Student Involvement)
Residential Life
Human Resources
Enrollment and Academic Services
MOSAIC
Martin Luther King Jr. Library
Counseling Services
Center for Service Learning
Office of Undergraduate Studies
Office of the Provost
Office of the Dean, College of Applied Sciences and Arts
Division of Intercollegiate Athletics
16
Table 5. Frequencies of MUSE seminars by college and academic year*.
MUSE Seminars by
College
Business
Applied Sciences & Arts
Education
Engineering
Humanities & Arts
Science
Social Science
Social Work
Other*
Total
2002
2003
2004
2005
4
17
6
3
25
9
20
3
0
87
2
19
2
4
14
5
10
1
4
61
2
17
0
2
10
3
7
2
6
49
3
16
0
3
10
3
12
2
6
55
*
2006
(predicted)
3
14
0
5
10
4
19
- **
3
58
The other category represents a number MUSE faculty who are appointed to the university in the Division
of Student Affairs (e.g., MOSAIC, Student Life and Leadership (now Student Involvement), Residential
Life, Vice President for Student Affairs, Legal Counsel for SJSU).
**
The College of Social Work was terminated in fall 2005.
17
Table 6. Represented are the responses of faculty (N=18) to the evaluation instrument of
the 2006 MUSE January Workshop*.
Item from Evaluation Instrument
Strongly
Agree
Agree
No
Opinion
I understand the goals of MUSE and how they are
achieved.
76.5
23.5
I gained knowledge of the components, guidelines,
and requirements of MUSE
70.6
29.4
I feel a sense of community and I created positive
relationships with other faculty across disciplines
47.1
47.1
I gained knowledge of active learning strategies
and how to implement them in MUSE.
64.7
35.3
I have an understanding of the various resources
on campus that assist students.
52.9
41.2
I am aware of what I can expect when teaching a
MUSE seminar.
64.7
29.4
Welcome and Ice Breaker
29.4
23.5
A Conversation about First Year Experience and
MUSE Goals
58.8
29.4
General Education Bits and Bytes
58.9
23.5
Faculty Panel
58.8
29.5
Peer Mentor Panel
52.9
23.5
Academic and Student Affairs panel: What
services are available to MUSE students
47.1
47.1
Designing Active Learning Environments
35.3
47.1
Know your MUSE Student
64.7
23.5
Implementing Writing Assignments in Your MUSE
seminar
35.2
35.3
5.9
Peer Review groups
35.3
23.5
17.6
Understanding what Makes Us Tick - Helping
Students Strive for Academic Success and Deal
Constructively with the Challenges of Failure
35.3
29.4
Communication and publicity for the workshop
52.9
23.5
Date of the workshop
41.2
41.2
Location
52.9
35.3
Check-in and registration
70.6
23.5
Workshop environment
64.7
23.5
Start and end times
47.1
35.3
Length of sessions
29.4
52.9
5.9
Length and number of breaks
29.4
35.3
23.5
Session topics
58.8
29.4
5.9
Continental Breakfast
35.3
41.2
11.8
Lunch
52.9
29.4
11.8
Hors D'Oeuvres
23.5
17.6
5.9
Snack Breaks
29.4
29.4

Missing data are not included in the rows.
18
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
5.9
17.6
11.8
5.9
5.9
5.9
11.8
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
11.8
Table 7. MUSE course assessment data for core general education and MUSE objectives
(data are reported in percentages). The GE Learning Objectives (LO) change by GE
Area.
Area
Course
Dept
Instructor
GE
LO1
GE
LO2
GE
L03
GE
LO4
GE
L05
MUSE
LO1
MUSE
L02
MUSE Courses Reviewed by BoGS in Spring 2005
D1
D1
E
E
Tech 12D
Pols 14D
RecL 14E
RecL 13E**
Backer
Nuger
Levine
Ross
86
85
87
86
82
85
80
86
77
85
93
97
91
85
80
79
86
85
-
91
85
85
87
86
100
80
79
100
100
-
88
85
100
85
90
98
98
87
90
80
91
75
100
85
95
98
98
79
90
80
MUSE Courses Reviewed by BoGS in Spring 2004
B1
C2
D1
D1
E
E
E
E
E
E
NuFS 26B
Chem 29C
Math 11D
Kin 10D
Kin 14E
ENG 13E*
MAS 11E
RecL 13E**
RecL 10E
Psych 11E
Morrill
Wren
Christie
Wughalter
Conry
Pham
Pizarro
Ross
Shepard
Steinberg
94
80
75
85
98
98
98
86
90
80
85
80
90
91
95
98
98
86
85
80
*
83
50
80
91
95
98
98
97
95
80
90
85
100
98
98
79
90
80
Course not approved by BOGS for continuing certification
Course was approved by BOGS for one additional year in 2004 and then an additional 3 years in
2005 review
**
19
Table 8. MUSE course assessment data for core GE and MUSE objectives (data are
reported by faculty in percentages of students who meet the objective). The specific
learning objectives (LO) change by GE Area. Average percentages for general education
objectives are provided as well as average percentages across general education areas for
the MUSE learning objectives.
Area
Course
Dept
Instructor
GE
LO1
GE
LO2
GE
L03
GE
LO4
GE
L05
MUSE
LO1
MUSE
L02
B1
NuFS 26B
Morrill
94
85
83
-
-
88
91
C2
Chem 29C
Wren
80
80
50
-
-
85
75
D1
D1
D1
D1
Tech 12D
Pols 14D
Math 11D
Kin 10D
Mean Area
D1
Backer
Nuger
Christie
Wughalter
86
85
75
85
82.75
82
85
90
91
87.00
77
85
80
91
83.25
91
85
90
85
87.75
86
85
100
100
92.75
91
85
100
85
90.25
86
100
100
85
92.75
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
RecL 14E
RecL 13E**
Kin 14E
ENG 13E*
MAS 11E
RecL 13E**
RecL 10E
Psych 11E
Mean Area E
Mean MUSE
ALL GE
Areas
Levine
Ross
Conry
Pham
Pizarro
Ross
Shepard
Steinberg
87
86
98
98
98
86
90
80
90.25
80
86
95
98
98
86
85
80
88.50
93
97
95
98
98
97
95
80
94.13
80
79
100
98
98
79
90
80
88.00
-
85
87
90
98
98
87
90
80
89.27
89.50
80
79
95
98
98
79
90
80
87.38
88.29
Table 9. Data provided indicate characteristics of MUSE seminar offerings and
enrollment history*.
*Fall Courses Only
Number of Seminars
Total Number of
Students
Average Students per
Seminar
Median Students per
Seminar
2002
MUSE
Cohort
(Year 1)
85
984
2003
MUSE
Cohort
2004
MUSE
Cohort
2005
MUSE
Cohort
60
893
49
799
55
865
2006
MUSE
Cohort
(predicted)
58
1050
11.58
14.83
16.31
15.72
18
11.96
16.00
16.00
16
18
*Data include fall seminars only
20
Table 10. Percent of within group members that responded to the NSSE (spring 2006)
item: “asked questions in class or contributed to class discussions” from 2006 survey of
first year students, disaggregated by those who took MUSE and did not take MUSE. A
limitation of these data is that the MUSE and non-MUSE groups do not account for
Science 2, Eng 10, Bus 10, and Humanities Honors factors and other coursework
affecting these scores..
MUSE seminar
No MUSE seminar
Total
Never
4.9
3.7
4.4
Sometimes
55.9
50.0
53.4
Often
23.8
26.9
25.1
Very Often
15.4
19.4
17.1
Table 11. Percent of first year students reporting that (spring 2006) they “prepared two
or more drafts of a paper or assignment before turning it in”, disaggregated by those who
took MUSE and did not take MUSE. A limitation of these data is that the MUSE and
non-MUSE groups do not account for Science 2, Eng 10, Bus 10, and Humanities Honors
factors and other coursework affecting these scores.
MUSE seminar
No MUSE seminar
Total
Never
14.7
19.4
16.7
Sometimes
35.0
38.0
36.3
Often
36.1
28.7
33.1
Very Often
14.0
13.9
13.9
Table 12. Percent of within group members that responded to the NSSE (spring 2006)
item.
MUSE seminar
No MUSE seminar
Total
Never
2.1
7.4
4.4
Sometimes
48.3
48.1
48.2
Often
37.1
29.6
33.9
Very Often
12.6
14.8
13.5
Table 13. MUSE effect on pass rate of LLD 001 and LLD 002.
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
Totals
*
Passed
346
326
245
267
1184
LLD & MUSE
Total
Pass %
482
72
408
80
346
71
384
70
1620
73
Passed
631
507
568
580
2286
LLD Only
Total
Pass %
989
64*
659
76
811
70
898
65
3357
68*
Pass rates for those with LLD and MUSE are significantly different than with LLD only.
21
Table 14 . Illustrated are the MUSE student responses to the item: “working with a Peer
Mentor helped me succeed in my first semester”.
Response
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Total
Frequency
43
78
92
11
5
229
Percent
18.8
34.1
40.2
4.8
2.2
100
Table 15. Percent of students in each category of the course evaluation for three sections
of Engineering 8 combined (N=76) for fall 2005.
Tours of various campus resources
Study habits – test taking skills
Time management
Stress management
Budgeting
Setting educational goals
Career center (resume)
Networking
Interviewing skills
Office of Student Life
Student leadership panel
SJSU alumni
Career Center log-in
Researching on-campus program
Resume
Career outlook paper
Company sponsored events
2-year academic plan
Peer network leader
Peer network program
Very
Poor
Poor
Fair/
Average
Good
Excellent
---1
-----1
----1
---1
1
----8
1
1
3
4
1
1
1
1
1
-5
3
3
1
3
20
17
20
25
15
11
13
16
25
17
22
21
20
16
9
17
16
16
7
5
40
45
45
42
38
43
36
43
41
51
47
41
29
41
33
26
33
41
16
18
41
38
34
32
36
43
50
34
29
28
28
33
50
42
57
51
48
36
21
17
22
Don’t
know/Not
Applicable
--1
-4
1
-4
1
1
1
4
-----4
8
9
Table 16. Percent of students in each category of the course evaluation for three sections
of Engineering 8 combined (N=76) for fall 2005.
Campus resources helped me navigate
through campus more effectively
Academic development contributed to my
success during my first semester.
Professional development provided a clear
understanding of the expectations of the
working world
Department presentations changed my
view of the engineering disciplines and job
opportunities
Because of my participation in this course,
I will become more involved in campus
activities in the future
Assignments and readings contributed to
my awareness of engineering and campus
resources
I would recommend the peer network
program to next year’s freshman class
Strongly
Disagree
--
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
7
13
37
Strongly
Disagree
43
--
3
37
47
13
--
3
20
47
30
--
3
20
47
30
--
13
27
43
17
--
3
43
30
23
--
7
7
23
23
Table 17. Summary of Students’ attitudes towards engineering before and after E10.
(Taken from Mourtos, N.J. & Furman, B.J.)
Item
1. Engineers have lots of opportunities to be creative.
2. Engineering seems like an exciting career.
3. Engineering is a prestigious profession.
4. Engineers have secure jobs.
5. Engineers make good salaries.
6. Engineers make important contributions to society.
7. Engineers are involved primarily with military and defense
work.
8. Most engineers are well-rounded people.
9. Engineers design and create products.
10. Engineering seems like a challenging career.
11. There is little difference between engineers and scientists.
12. I would rather be an engineer than a scientist.
13. Most engineering is done in teams.
14. I hope to be an engineer someday.
15. There are ample career opportunities in engineering for women.
16. There are ample career opportunities in engineering for
minorities.
17. I think I have what it takes to be a successful engineer.
23
Before E10
.74
.71
.68
.39
.74
.80
.10
After E10
.78
.69
.72
.43
.68
.81
.15
Change
.04
-.01
.04
.03
-.05
.01
.05
.17
.67
.89
.19
.65
.66
.90
.51
.53
.27
.65
.86
.24
.70
.75
.83
.57
.59
.11
-.02
-.02
.05
.06
.08
-.08
.06
.06
.77
.74
-.03