QEP Topic Selection Committee
Final Report
Submitted April 27, 2010, by Leonard Pysh, Chairperson
Section One.
QEP Topic Selection Committee Roster
Heath Brown, Assistant Professor of Public Affairs
Denise Greene, Assistant Professor of Psychology
William Greer, Associate Dean for Student Success Initiatives
Jane Ingram, Professor of Mathematics and Computer Science
Melissa Lacombe, Associate Director of Financial Aid
Jan Lynch, Professor of Psychology
David Moxley, Class of 2011
Bruce Partin, Professor of Theatre
Leonard Pysh, Associate Professor of Biology
Leah Russell, Associate Dean and Registrar
Katherine Schlimmer, Class of 2011
Matthew Tripp, Class of 2011
Ned Wisnefske, Charles and Helen Schumann Professor of Lutheran Theology
Section Two.
The QEP: A Definition
By definition, the QEP describes a carefully designed course of action that addresses a welldefined and focused topic or issue related to enhancing student learning. The QEP should be embedded
within the institution’s ongoing integrated institution-wide planning and evaluation process and may
very well evolve from this existing process or from other processes related to the institution’s internal
reaffirmation review.
Developing a QEP as a part of the reaffirmation process is an opportunity for the institution to
enhance overall institutional quality and effectiveness by focusing on an issue or issues the institution
considers important to improving student learning.
Within the context of the QEP as a requirement for reaffirmation, the Commission on Colleges
broadly defines student learning as changes in




knowledge
skills
behaviors
or values
Within the context of their own particular Quality Enhancement Plan, member institutions must specify
realistic, measurable student learning outcomes appropriate for their focused topic.
-The Quality Enhancement Plan, pp. 3-4
1
Section Three.
Overview of Process:
In Fall 2009, the President and the Dean constituted the QEP Topic Selection Committee, which
began meeting Monday, October 26, 2009. Over the course of the fall semester, the Committee had
extensive discussions about possible topics using Derek Bok’s book Our Underachieving Colleges as a
framework to facilitate our discussions. We combed through a variety of institutional reports (including
the 2009 Alumni Survey Report, the 2007 Graduating Student Survey Report, the 2009 NSSE Data, the
2008 Climate Survey Report, the 2008 Programmatic Initiatives Report, and the 2002 Student Culture
Report by Shuh and Whitt) and, by the end of the semester, had developed a list of topics for further
consideration and had also identified sources of data to support the selection of each of these topics
(see Document 1).
In Spring 2010, the Committee refined the topics and developed two surveys to determine the
support for each of the topics by the constituencies on campus (the faculty, the staff, and the students,
as well as three recent alumni classes). One survey consisted of a list of sixteen (16) possible topics for
consideration. The Committee purposefully excluded several topics on the basis of their being
addressed by the new Intellectual Inquiry curriculum (i.e., critical thinking, written communication, and
oral communication). Each respondent was asked to choose up to five (5) of the possible topics that
s/he thought would “enhance [his/her/the] college experience”. The second survey consisted of a
similar list of topics but asked the respondent to “rate the College’s effectiveness” in each of the given
areas using a Likert scale ranging from “very ineffective” to “very effective”.
Half of the faculty, staff, and three years of alumni (Classes of 2009, 2007, and 2005) received an
electronic invitation to complete the topic survey, while the other halves of these groups were invited to
complete the effectiveness survey. Each of these groups had about two and a half weeks in which to
complete and return their surveys. All data from these groups were collected electronically. For the
topic survey, we had 79 faculty respondents, 71 staff respondents, and 65 alumni respondents. For the
effectiveness survey, we had 77 faculty respondents, 44 staff respondents, and 44 alumni respondents.
(Response rates for the topic survey: 50.8% faculty/staff and 10.1% alumni. Response rates for the
effectiveness survey: 42.0% faculty/staff and 6.8% alumni.)
The student surveys were completed on paper in the INQ 120, GST 202, GST 370, GST 400, HNRS
170, HNRS 202, HNRS 301, or HNRS 411 sections that were being offered. We received 531 topic
surveys from the students, of which 50 were not included in the analyses due to the respondent having
chosen more than six topics. We received 531 effectiveness surveys, all of which were included.
Once the data were analyzed, the Committee chose to recommend for final consideration the
four topics chosen by at least 40% of one of the groups (the full set of data is presented in Document 2).
These topics were Experiential Learning (chosen by 50.6% faculty, 46.5% staff, 48.4% students, and
53.8% alumni), Post-graduate Success (chosen by 16.5% faculty, 40.8% staff, 56.4% students, and 63.1%
alumni), College Climate (43.0% faculty, 31.0% staff, 18.9% students, 26.2% alumni), and Study Abroad
(51.9% faculty, 31.0% staff, 36.8% students, and 16.9% alumni). As can be seen by these numbers, more
than 40% of the respondents in all four groups chose Experiential Learning, and a sufficient number of
respondents in three of the groups (all except the faculty) chose Post-graduate Success. The only group
2
that chose College Climate and Study Abroad at a sufficiently high level for consideration was the
faculty, whose opinion, of course, should be given considerable weight.
[In fact, SACS goes so far as to say “Since faculty members shoulder the responsibility for student
learning, they should be appropriately represented in the early phases of the development of the QEP….
Faculty members, in particular, need to agree that the issues identified for the QEP are sufficiently
significant to engage individuals in implementation and follow-through, not only for enhancing student
learning and/or the environment for supporting student learning on an institutional level but also for
engaging the long-term commitment of faculty and other individuals on whom the implementation and
continuation of the plan will depend. The Quality Enhancement Plan, p. 8]
Having identified these four topics, the members of the Committee formed small working
groups and combed through the institutional data one more time to supplement our previous findings.
Each group wrote a report, found in the following section. Each report begins with a brief overview,
then includes a more extensive discussion and presentation of the institutional data each working group
found that supported a need in that area.
Having worked through the process and the institutional data, the Committee is agreed that all
sixteen of the topics on the topic survey could serve as starting points for the development of
Roanoke’s QEP. Institutional data is available to support the selection of all of them, although we have
more (and perhaps stronger) data to support some topics than others. (As an aside, the Committee has
observed that additional data in certain areas would certainly be helpful to the institution in the future;
for example, it would be helpful to know how students define each of these terms and what impact
financial limitations have on study abroad participation). While the committee recognizes that it made a
somewhat arbitrary final decision to focus on the four topics that made the 40% cut-off on the topics
survey, we are also in agreement that these four topics are those most likely to garner the support of
the members of the College community, based on the results of the topics survey.
We would be remiss, however, not to point out that the effectiveness survey indicates that the
College is already doing relatively well in these four areas and that it may be wise to keep in mind other
areas in which we are not doing as well. The results of the two surveys point to different choices,
depending on whether the institution chooses to focus its QEP on (a) a topic for which improvements in
student learning can perhaps be more readily demonstrated (based on current effectiveness) or (b) a
topic for which institutional support can perhaps be more readily demonstrated (based on current
interest). These two objectives are not mutually exclusive.
3
Section Four.
Working Group Reports
Experiential Learning:
Providing Unique Learning Opportunities
Prepared by Jan Lynch, Matt Tripp and William Greer
Overview:
After reviewing the institutional data, we have found that the reports that contained the most telling
data in support of experiential learning at Roanoke are the Schuh and Whitt Climate Study from 2002
and the Graduating Student Survey (GSS) that is facilitated annually by the Roanoke Office of Career
Development. Schuh and Whitt, as well as the GSS, report that community service is popular with
students and serves as a valuable opportunity. The GSS highlights the high value of student internships
and undergraduate research (independent study and summer scholar). Schuh and Whitt also share that
outdoor adventure presents a great opportunity for student engagement. Both community service and
outdoor adventure are areas that naturally mesh with the pedagogy of experiential learning. Numerous
schools across the country draw heavily from community service and outdoor adventure. Several areas
discussed by Schuh and Whitt that directly relate to experiential learning and provide an opportunity for
improvement are: 1) connecting residence life with the academic mission of the college; 2) allowing
students to experience freedom outside of the classroom; 3) developing sanctions that are educational
and not punitive when bad choices are made; 4) developing a residence life model that places emphasis
on building community rather than producing activities; 5) advising 1st year students from within their
department of academic interest and 6) encouraging faculty to embrace a pedagogy that is engaging.
The new Strategic Plan also points heavily towards the integration of experiential learning into many
facets of the College.
Schuh, Whitt Report (Spring 2002)
 a need for activities that are not Greek
 community service is popular with RC students
 outdoor adventures presents a great opportunity
 opportunity to connect Residence Life with Academics (bring faculty into the residence halls and
other co-curricular venues)
 learning communities are needed for 1st year students
 social life at the college is controlled (enforcement of rules) and students need to be allowed to
learn through their choices (good and bad). Sanctions should be educational and not punitive!
 residence life staff focus on producing activities rather than building community
 faculty complain that students are not engaged in the curriculum… an experiential learning
based pedagogy will engage more students
 the need to have 1st year students advised by their “academic department” (intended major or
student interest)
4
Roanoke College Strategic Plan
The first two themes of the new RC Strategic Plan are filled with experiential learning!
Theme #1: To provide broad, deep and experiential education programs that advance our vision of
“Freedom with Purpose.”
Every Roanoke student will experience a broad, deep and experiential liberal arts education
focused on developing his or her confident sense of freedom in the world and a sense of purpose in using
that freedom.
The new Intellectual Inquiry curriculum provides the breadth of a Roanoke education. Majors
provide education depth. Expanding experiential educational opportunities for all students, in
combination with the curriculum and the “Freedom with Purpose” vision, will provide a Roanoke
educational experience that compares well with, but stands out in important ways from, what other
leading liberal arts colleges offer. We will bring about breadth, depth and experiential learning in the
following ways:









Enhance existing academic programs and add new ones that make a Roanoke education
distinctive and regionally and nationally competitive.
Increase number of students involved in research, independent study, study abroad, internships,
service learning, and leadership experiences to the highest levels in Roanoke’s history.
Integrate the Intensive Learning Term into the Intellectual Inquiry Curriculum.
Expand the size of the Honors Program.
Integrate cross-cultural learning opportunities into the life of the College to better prepare
students for life in a multicultural society.
Make study abroad financially accessible to students.
Expand post-graduate opportunities for Roanoke students. Each year Roanoke students will
receive national fellowships and awards (such as Goldwater, Fulbright, Truman, and Rhodes
Scholarships). Develop programs to groom students for these honors, scholarships, and
fellowships.
Increase the number of students attending graduate and professional schools will to 45% within
two years of graduation. Focus on preparing students for medical and law school admission.
Prepare students rigorously and thoroughly for entry-level employment.
Theme #2: To link the academic, co-curricular and residential experience in ways that embody the
“Freedom with Purpose” vision.
The nature of Roanoke College gives us an opportunity to draw on the residential aspects of
students’ lives to enhance their academic experience. We will weave together the residential and
academic experiences to fulfill our intention to educate the whole person at Roanoke and especially our
students’ sense of freedom and purpose in the world.
 Enhance the residential nature of the learning experience by housing 75% of our students on
campus.
 Create an environment where intellect and character are developed with intentionality. Promote
academic and personal integrity.
 Add co-curricular programs that make the overall Roanoke educational experience competitive
and distinctive regionally and nationally.
5


Develop a Yale-style house system to integrate academic and co-curricular life.
Provide opportunities for athletics to ensure regional and national competitiveness.
National Survey on Student Engagement
The NSSE data do not provide much support for experiential learning as a QEP topic.
 The 2009 freshmen data shows that we're actually somewhat ahead of the national average in
the student body's perception of experience in the working force that they get here at Roanoke.
We are fairly similar in the field of speaking clearly and effectively, something we would tie into
our topic. We do come up somewhat lacking in computer and information technologies ability,
though it's a very small difference (-.18). In terms of integrating data for presentations and
papers, we are yet again ahead of the curve, though only slightly (.05).
 In the 2009 Senior data, we actually rank ahead of the national curve in terms of internships or
clinical assignments (57% vs. 52%) and study abroad (31% vs. 15%; however, we would consider
this number considerably inflated as we are relatively certain that IL courses have been counted
into the study abroad statistics for Roanoke). We still lag behind in technology, but again, it's by
a very small percentage.
Alumni Survey Data (Roanoke College Office of Resource Development)
 Graduates Comments - many in response to question “Which aspects of your education and
experiences at RC have been the most valuable to you since you graduated?”
- 2 mentioned unnamed events outside of the classroom
- 3 mentioned internships
- 1 mentioned the Summer Scholar Program
Graduating Student Survey (Roanoke College office of Career Development)
 Again, answers came as student comments to the question “describe the three most valuable
experiences” they had while a student here.
Internships –indicated by 53
Community Service- indicated by 48
Independent Study, Summer Scholar, research w/ faculty-indicated by 28
Institutional Data on Experiential Learning (2009 graduating cohort)
Independent studies, Student research, and Related activities
Internships and Education Field Experience/Student Teaching
Study Abroad (semester of year)
Study Abroad (May Term and summer programs)
129 of 450 students
166 of 450 students
31 of 450 students
158 of 450 students
28.7%
36.9%
6.9%
35.1%
Any of the above
316 of 450 students
70.2%
6
Post-Graduate Success
Preparing for Life after College
Prepared by Melissa Lacombe, Jane Ingram, Katie Schlimmer
Overview:
Post-graduate Success received strong support as a possible topic for the QEP by students, staff, and
alumni, according to the survey conducted by the QEP selection committee. Data supporting this
selection can also be found in the Alumni Surveys of 2003 and 2008, the NSSE Survey and the Strategic
Plan. The Alumni Survey of 2003 and 2008 graduates points to some feelings of unpreparedness for
their job. It also indicates that several alumni feel that their first job was unsuitable. The most striking
statistics indicate that most alumni report using very few of the opportunities available through Career
Services throughout their academic career at Roanoke College. The NSSE survey contained a few
questions directly related to Post-Graduate Success. While the differences between the responses of
Roanoke College students and those at the Select comparison group were not statistically significant,
the responses themselves may be important enough to consider when choosing the QEP topic. The
NSSE survey also asked respondents questions addressing particular skills or experiences needed for
success after college. Several of these, such as the number reporting having done a practicum,
internship, and so on, indicate that Roanoke College is below the Select comparison group. Additionally,
the Strategic Plan points specifically to goals of expanding post-graduate opportunities for Roanoke
students and increasing the number attending graduate and professional schools.
Detailed Report:
Tie in w/Strategic Plan:
Theme #1: To provide broad, deep and experiential education programs that advance our vision of
“Freedom with Purpose.”
Every Roanoke student will experience a broad, deep and experiential liberal arts education
focused on developing his or her confident sense of freedom in the world and a sense of purpose in using
that freedom.


Expand post-graduate opportunities for Roanoke students. Each year Roanoke students will
receive national fellowships and awards (such as Goldwater, Fulbright, Truman, and Rhodes
Scholarships). Develop programs to groom students for these honors, scholarships, and
fellowships.
Increase the number of students attending graduate and professional schools will to 45% within
two years of graduation. Focus on preparing students for medical and law school admission.
Job Preparation
Nearly 10% of recent graduates and roughly 7% of grads 6 years out responded that Roanoke College
prepared them either poorly or not at all for their current job (Alumni Survey 2003 and 2008)
7
“The percentage of grads feeling that their 1st job was not suitable was 35%, the highest figure in many
years” (Alumni Survey 2003 and 2008)
29% of seniors reported either no experience or occasional experience making a class presentation
(NSSE Senior Results)
8% of seniors reported never talking about career plans with a faculty member or advisors (NSSE Senior
Results)
43% of seniors reported never having done a practicum, internship, field experience, co-op experience,
or clinical assignment (NSSE Senior Results)
27% of seniors reported that the College helped them cope with their non-academic responsibilities very
little (NSSE Senior Results)
19.1% of 2008 graduates reported that their current job relates to their college major compared to
28.3% in 2007 (Alumni Survey)
The satisfaction level of our recent graduates on their current job is slipping (Alumni Survey)
Community Involvement
25% of 2008 grads don’t report any civic/community activities; 23% of 2003 grads don’t report any
civic/community activities (Alumni Survey 2003 and 2008)
43% of seniors reported never participating in a community-based project as part of a regular course
(NSSE Senior Results)
Fiscal Responsibility
Only 27.5% of grads 6 years out and 305% of recent grads report that their college experience helped
them manage their financial/family finances better (Alumni Survey 2003 and 2008)
33.3% of respondents in 2004/06 reported that Roanoke College helped them manage personal/family
finances very little. 37.1% reported the same thing in 2003/04. (Graduating Student Survey, 2006)
Career Planning
10% of 2008 grads rated the use of Career Services and getting career/job information as poor (Alumni
Survey 2003 and 2008)
Usage rates for almost all services provided by Roanoke’s Career Services Office were down (Alumni
Survey 2003 and 2008).
Over 50% of our 2008 grads did not use Career Services for help with interviewing skills (Alumni Survey
2003 and 2008).
Often students are assigned faculty advisors outside of their area of interests. (SCHUH report)
8
Study Abroad:
Providing and Supporting Opportunities for
International Study
Prepared by Denise Greene, Bruce Partin, and Leah Russell
Overview:
The topic of study abroad spans many areas that are reflected in the College’s Strategic Plan, including
global and cultural awareness and experiential learning. Only 22.6% of the respondents in the
Graduating Student Survey reported having a study abroad experience. On the same survey, we were
concerned to note that there was a high report of dissatisfaction with information provided by the
International Education Office, as well as how students perceived their treatment by staff in that office.
The opportunity to study abroad, either through May term or a semester abroad program, would
support the college’s mission to enhance experiential learning as well as global and cultural awareness.
Note: There were no questions in the survey instruments we reviewed concerning whether the cost of
study abroad is prohibitive. We would recommend that this be included in future surveys since many
groups on campus believe that this is an issue.
Detailed Report:
Alumni Survey – no usable supporting data
May term cited as a valuable experience (1/163)
NSSE Surveys
2006 Freshman/2009 Senior comparison
Have done study abroad
2006 Yes – 2%
2009 Yes – 31%
Senior Results
Have done (or plan to do for 2000, 2003) study abroad
2000 Yes – 32%
2003 Yes – 34%
2006 Yes – 35%
2009 Yes – 31%
Freshmen Results
Have done (or plan to do for 2000, 2003)
2000 Yes – 29%
9
2003
2006
2009
Yes – 49%
Yes – 2%
Yes – 2%
Graduating Student Survey
Most Valuable Experiences While a Student at Roanoke:
People and relationships figured prominently in student’s comments…study abroad and May Travel.
81 out of 358 (22.6%)
Treatment in Campus Offices:
International Education
Positive interaction with staff:
04-06 D:7%; SD:9%
03-04 D:12%; SD:12%
Valuable information provided:
04-06 D:13%; SD13%
03-04 D:16%; SD14%
Strategic Plan
Programmatic Initiatives Report (2008)
Study Abroad and Cross-cultural Learning - $2 million
New
Make study abroad financially accessible to students
Data from Office of International Education
Academic
Year
RC
Graduates
Sem/Yr
Abroad
% Sem/Yr
Abroad
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
385
402
397
417
429
450
N/A
24
23
32
48
40
N/A
5.9%
5.8%
7.7%
11.2%
8.9%

May IL
Travel
Abroad
166 (135)
142 (142)
172 (109)
160 (160)
127 (108)
117 (71)*
Mexico trip was cancelled April 2009 due to H1N1 outbreak.
10
Total Travel
Abroad
% Travel
Abroad
N/A
174
140
200
164
119
N/A
45%
35%
48%
38%
26%
Campus Climate:
Fostering a Community of Learning and Personal Integrity
Prepared by Len Pysh, starting with observations originally made by Denise Greene
Overview:
The numerical indictors that capture the campus academic climate have remained largely static for the
past ten or more years (for example, the incoming freshmen average GPA, incoming freshmen average
SAT, grade distributions for all students). In response to both internally- and externally-derived data
(including the 2002 Shuh and Whitt Student Culture Report and the NSSE surveys), the College has,
however, made some significant changes to its academic programs that will likely have a significant
positive impact on the academic climate in the future, including the re-envisioning of its Freshmen
Orientation (increasing its academic focus by incorporating a required reading) and the establishment of
a novel general education program. Institutional data (particularly the NSSE data, the Alumni Surveys,
and the Graduating Student Surveys) indicate additional areas of challenge, including raising the
academic expectations for all of our students (hours spent on readings/homework, for example) and
encouraging them to interact with others of different backgrounds, to participate in cultural events, and
to become more invested in their education in general.
Detailed Report:
Focus on Freshmen Experiences
The NSSE data indicate that our freshmen report scores significantly lower than their peers at other
liberal arts college (data from 2000 and 2003) or than their peers at selected liberal arts institutions
(data from 2006 and 2009) in a variety of areas.
In the area of “Level of Academic Challenge”, our freshmen report





(#1) less time preparing for class (significantly lower all 4 yrs)
(#2) fewer assigned textbooks, books, or book-length packs of course readings (4 yrs)
(#6) less coursework that emphasizes analyzing the basic elements of an idea, experience, or
theory (3 yrs)
(#7) less coursework that emphasizes synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or
experiences (4 yrs) [SR also report this 2 of 4 years]
(#11) less emphasis on spending significant amount of time studying and academic work (4 yrs)
[SR also report this 2 of 4 years] [This is corroborated by the GSS, which indicates that students
expect more students serious about studying than they experience. (p. 5)]
In the area of Active and Collaborative Learning, our freshmen report


(#2) making fewer class presentations (3 yrs)[but SR report opposite in 2 of 4 yrs]
(#4) working less with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments (4 yrs)
In the area of Enriching Educational Experiences, our freshmen report


(#2) a lower likelihood of planning to do a practicum, internship, field experience, co-op
experience or clinical assignment (2 of 3 yrs)
(#10) fewer having had serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity than
their own (3 yrs) [SR also report this 3 yrs]
11

(#12) fewer agree that the campus climate encourages contact among students from different
economic, social and racial or ethnic backgrounds. (last 2 times) [SR also report this last 2 times]
In the area of Other Questions about College Activities, our freshmen report

(#12) Fewer attended an art exhibit, play, dance, music, theater, or other performance (2 of 2
yrs) [SR also report this last 2 yrs]
In the area of Extent to Which Your College Experience Has Helped You with…, our freshmen report


(#1) a lower impact on acquiring a broad general education. (3 yrs)
(#12) a lower impact on understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds (2 of last 2)
Finally, in their Overall Satisfaction with Your College Experience, our freshmen report

(#2) lower scores on “How would you evaluate your entire educational experience at this
institution?” (last 2 yrs)
Focus on Senior Experiences
While most scores reported by seniors are statistically indistinguishable from the peers at other
liberal arts institutions, there are some exceptions (some of which were noted in the above section on
freshmen scores).
In the area of Student Interactions with Faculty Members, fewer seniors reported

(#5) receiving prompt feedback from faculty on academic performance (last 2 times)
In the area of Supportive Campus Environment, our seniors reported a

(#4) a lower rating of quality of relationships with other students (last 3 times). [The GSS result s
indicate that students expect more friendly students than they experience (p. 5).]
In the area of Other Questions about College Activities, our seniors reported more than their peers that

(#11) coursework emphasizes memorizing facts, ideas, or methods so you can repeat them. (3
yrs)
In the area of Overall Satisfaction with Your College Experience, our seniors reported less than their
peers that

(#3) If you could start over again, would you go to the same institution? (last 2 yrs) [Based on
AS, the “not” numbers run from 5.0-10.2% for recent grads and 0.7-9.1% for grads 6 yrs out (p.
9). Based on AS, the “not” numbers for choose the same major again are 9.7-13.8% for recent
grads and 11.9-22.2% for grads 6 yrs out (p. 10). Based on GSS, students expect better quality
programs than they experience (p. 5). Based on GSS, students also expect a greater sense of
community than they experience (p. 6). Based on GSS, students find the school “cliquish” (p.
10).]
In addition, while our seniors’ scores in all other areas do not differ significantly from their peers, several
points should be considered:



25%/48%/40%/35% report that they spend less than 10 hours/week preparing for class
80%/79%/75%/79% have read fewer than 5 books on their own in the past year
22%/19%/20%/18% report never preparing two or more drafts of a paper or assignment
12










26%/23% (only on last two surveys) report coming to class without completing readings or
assignments “often” or “very often”
56%/59%/58%/62% report that their coursework emphasizes memorizing facts, ideas, or
methods from courses and reading so they can repeat them in pretty much the same form
26%/32%/23%/28% report not having to write a 20+ page paper their senior year
37%/37%/40%/40% report “never” or “occasionally” working harder than they thought they could
to meet an instructor’s standards or expectations
44%/69%/57%/58% report not having worked with a faculty member on a research project or
report not planning to do so
61%/66%/67%/70% report not having done or planning to do an independent study
31%/31%/39%/37% report not having done a culminating senior experience
17%/14%/13%/17% report “never” having serious conversations with students of a different race
or ethnicity than their own
31%/18%/26%/20% report that the campus environment emphasizes encouraging contacts
among students from different economic, social, and racial or ethnical background “very little”
12%/18%/20%/21% report that their college experience has helped them to understand people of
other racial or ethnic backgrounds “very little”
Finally, (where there were significant differences from their peers), the NSSE data suggest that we as an
institution had little impact on the Class of 2009 in the areas of







Hours studying per week (Fr: 7% 0-5 hours/ wk; Sr: 14% 0-5 hours/week)
Requiring synthesis and organizing of ideas, information, or experiences (Fr: 32% very little or
some; Sr: 22% very little or some)
Having serious conversations with students of a different race (Fr: 59% never or occasionally; Sr:
58% never or occasionally)
Encouraging contact among students from different economic, social, and racial and ethnic
backgrounds (Fr: 52% very little or some; Sr: 47% very little or some)
Attending an art exhibit, play, dance, music, theater, or other performance (Fr: 20% never; Sr:
31% never)
Enhancing their spirituality (Fr: 39% no participation; Sr: 49% no participation)
Understanding people of other racial or ethnic backgrounds (Fr: 19% very little; Sr: 21% very
little)
The 2002 Shuh and Whitt Student Culture Report as well as data found in the Alumni Survey Report and
the Graduating Student Survey Report corroborate these observations. A sample of such data from the
Alumni Survey Report (pp. 11-12) is reproduced below. (As context, the alumni are given three options
in answering this question: Very much, Somewhat, Very little. )
13
14
15