Doing Things Differently:
Lessons from Two Campuses
Scott E. Evenbeck, Ph.D.
Stella and Charles Guttman Community College, CUNY
Scott E. Evenbeck
President
Stella and Charles Guttman
Community College
50 West 40th Street
New York, NY 10018
(646) 313-8020
scott.evenbeck@guttman.cuny.edu
Abstract
Getting different results mandates doing things
differently. What are some principles and practices
that might foster student academic success?
Brookfield urged that we become reflective
practitioners. We are good at that within our
disciplines and professional areas of work; we make
it our business to do so. What are some principles
and practices across campus that would create a
culture centered on student learning and success?
Outline
● Guiding Principles
● Elements
> All participate
> Support from the top
> Collaborative/ Work done differently
> Structure to do the work
> Attention to everyone and to special populations
> Pathways (Orientation, Bridge, Learning Communities, Academic
Support, Focus on Mentors)
> No separate remediation
> Limited majors, city-centric curriculum, building on existing
knowledge and comments, and the big picture
> Learning outcomes
Some Guiding Principles
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
High Expectations
Involvement
Assessment and Feedback
Collaboration
Transparency
Do the Work Differently
Celebrate our Students
Be Explicit about Learning Outcomes
Elements
All Participate
Everyone has to be part of the
work.
An example…
All-College Faculty-Staff Meeting
AGENDA
8:30 –9:00
Breakfast
9:00 –9:45
Welcome, Introductions
9:45 –10:15
State of the College (Scott Evenbeck, President)
10:15 –10:30
Break
10:30 –11:30
Alumni Peer Mentor Roundtable (Discussion Facilitator, DanielAmbrose, Director of Mentoring and Student Success
11:30 –12:15
Clicking on Guttman
Open Mike: 3 minutes to tell a success story, offer kudos, describe a challenge
12:15 –12:45
Group Photo
12:45 –1:30
Box Lunch
1:30 –2:10
Our Institutional Effectiveness Plan: Being SAGE(Elisa Hertz, Director for the Center of College Effectiveness)
2:10 –2:30
An Overview of the Middle States Process and Timeline (Stuart Cochran, Dean of Strategic Planning)
2:30 –3:30
Revisiting Guttman’sPreliminary Governance Plan(Introduction by Joan Lucariello, VPAcademicAffairs & Provost; Discussion Facilitator:
Lynette M. Phillips, Esq., Legal Counsel)
3:30 –4:00
Conduct & Title IX (David Jones,Associate Director of Student Conduct & Housing
Yvette Santana, University Manager of Student ConductCentral Office of StudentAffairs)
4:00 –5:00
Reception
Support from the Top
John Gardner
Support from the top
● Structure to do the work
●
Collaborative/ Work
Done Differently
You won’t get different results
if you don’t do the work
differently.
CATALYST PAPER
Sturm, S., Eatman, T., Saltmarsh, J., & Bush, A. (2011). Full participation:
Building the architecture for diversity and public engagement in higher
education (White paper). Columbia University Law School: Center for
Institutional and Social Change.
1.
Increasing student access and success, particularly for underrepresented, first-generation,
and low-income students;
2.
Diversifying higher education faculties, often with separate projects for hiring, retention, and
climate;
3.
Promoting community, civic, or public engagement for students; and,
4.
Increasing support for faculty‘s public or engaged scholarship.
At: http://imaginingamerica.org/fg-item/full-participation-building-the-architecture-for-diversity-and-community-engagement-in-higher-education/
CATALYST PAPER
Often, the kind of change occurring on campus aimed at addressing diversity,
inclusion, retention, college completion, improving teaching and learning, or
community engagement (Saltmarsh, Hartley, & Clayton, 2009) is associated
with what Larry Cuban (1988) has described as “first-order change,” which
aims to improve “the efficiency and effectiveness of what is done...to make
what already exists more efficient and more effective, without disturbing the
basic organizational features, [and] without substantially altering the ways in
which [faculty and students] perform their roles” (p. 341). First-order changes
do not address the core culture of the institution. They do not get at the
institutional architecture. They do not require what Eckel, Hill, and Green
(1998) refer to as changes that “alter the culture of the institution,” those
which require “major shifts in an institution‘s culture – the common set of
beliefs and values that creates a shared interpretation and understanding of
events and actions” (p. 3).
At: http://imaginingamerica.org/fg-item/full-participation-building-the-architecture-for-diversity-and-community-engagement-in-higher-education/
CATALYST PAPER
“Second-order changes introduce new goals, structures, and roles that
transform familiar ways of doing things into new ways of solving persistent
problems”
(p. 341). Second-order changes are associated with
transformational change, which “(1) alters the culture of the institution by
changing select underlying assumptions and institutional behaviors,
processes, and products; (2) is deep and pervasive, affecting the whole
institution; (3) is intentional; and (4) occurs over time” (Eckel, Hill, & Green,
1998, p. 3). Most importantly, for these efforts to be transformative, there
needs to be integration of change efforts focused on cultural change:
“Institution-wide patterns of perceiving, thinking, and feeling; shared
understandings; collective assumptions; and common interpretive frameworks
are the ingredients of this ‘invisible glue’ called institutional culture” (p. 3). An
architectural approach is aimed at culture change that creates more
welcoming environments that respond more fully to the needs of diverse
students, faculty, and staff, allowing campuses to more fully achieve their
public mission.
At: http://imaginingamerica.org/fg-item/full-participation-building-the-architecture-for-diversity-and-community-engagement-in-higher-education/
CATALYST PAPER
An architecture of full participation thus results from a long-term yet urgent
“campaign” animated by a shared vision, guided by institutional mindfulness,
and sustained by an ongoing collaboration among leaders at many levels of
the institution and community. The process of building this architecture will
better equip higher education institutions to make good on their stated
commitments to diversity, publicly engaged scholarship, and student success.
It will also cultivate vibrant and dynamic communities that build multigenerational knowledge and leadership capacity, in collaboration with
communities, to revitalize communities and democratic institutions.
At: http://imaginingamerica.org/fg-item/full-participation-building-the-architecture-for-diversity-and-community-engagement-in-higher-education/
Instructional Team
● Faculty
● Advisor
● Librarian
● Peer Mentor
Structure to do the
Work
There has to be a different way of working.
Persons do different things when they come
to Campus.
Attention to Everyone and
to Special Populations
Take programs to scale. First generation
students don’t do options.
Pathways (Orientation,
Bridge, Learning
Communities, Academic
Support, Focus on Mentors
The cafeteria approach doesn’t work.
Students need clear pathways.
No Separate Remediation
The data show that remediation is not
effective.
Limited Majors, City-Centric
Curriculum, Building on
Existing Knowledge and
Commitments, and the Big
Picture
There are some features of the work at Stella
and Charles Guttman Community College.
They draw upon the LEAP Principles.
Learning Outcomes
PUL’s
GLO’s
Principles of Undergraduate Learning (PUL)
In the classrooms…
In the stairwells…
Learning Outcomes
LEARNING OUTCOMES
Stella and Charles Guttman Community College’s learning outcomes
encourage students to aim high and provide them with a framework for
their entire educational experience, connecting school, college, work and
life. These outcomes build on Lumina Foundation’s Degree Qualifications
Profile and are informed by AAC&U’s LEAP Essential Learning Outcomes.
They are an inclusive framework for a contemporary liberal education,
defined not as a selected set of disciplines, but as a set of knowledge and
skills for all aspects of life: school, work, citizenship, and social
responsibility. They are reflective of the college’s mission and values.
Students will know from the time they enter Guttman Community College
that they will be expected to demonstrate progress in achieving these
outcomes. Institutional learning outcomes will be addressed at the course
and program level. They will be based on integrative learning in and
beyond the classroom and will be assessed via students’ coursework as
collected and presented in their e-portfolios
ELEMENT
ALL PARTICIPATE
SUPPORT FROM THE TOP
COLLABORATIVE / WORK DONE DIFFERENTLY
STRUCTURE TO DO THE WORK
ATTENTION TO EVERYONE
AND TO SPECIAL POPULATIONS
PATHWAYS (ORIENTATION, BRIDGE,
LEARNING COMMUNITIES, ACADEMIC
SUPPORT, FOCUS ON MENTORS)
NO SEPARATE REMEDIATION
LIMITED MAJORS, CITY-CENTRIC
CURRICULUM, BUILDING ON EXISTING
KNOWLEDGE AND COMMITMENTS, AND
THE BIG PICTURE
LEARNING OUTCOMES
IUPUI
GUTTMAN
MARKERS OF THE MODEL

Clear Pathways from High School and GED Programs to GCC

Information Sessions

Bridge

Integrated Developmental Education

Full-time Enrollment in the First Year

Learning Community
 Including City Seminar and Ethnographies of Work

Integration of Curriculum with Co-Curricular Activities and
Experiential Education

Focus on Assessment and Evaluation
MARKERS OF THE MODEL
What are the data?
Enrollment Growth
Total Enrollment 692
88
Total Enrollment 493
194
Total Enrollment 289
215
410
289
278
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Fall 2014
Academic Characteristics At Entry
Academic Characteristics
Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2014
Cohort Cohort Cohort
N=289
N=278
N=410
Admissions average based on high school grades
Fully proficient in reading, writing, and math, at
entry
74.8
75.2
74.7*
10%
12%
15%
Not proficient in any subject, at entry
16%
17%
18%
*Preliminary data
Retention and Graduation Rates
1 Yr
2 Yr
2 Yr
2 Yr Graduation
Retention Graduation Retention + 2 Yr Retention
Cohort Year
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Fall 2012 N=289 74%
28%
30%
58%
Fall 2013 N=278
70%
--
--
--
Fall 2014 Student Demographics
•
•
•
•
•
•
692 students
100% of freshmen are full-time
90% of all students are full-time
59% female and 41% male
80% of FAFSA filers received Pell grants
Students from all boroughs
Bronx 30%, Bklyn 24%, Queens 21%, Manhattan 20%, Staten Island 1%
• Diverse student body
Hispanic 52%, African American 25%, White 16%,
Asian/Pacific Islander 7%, American Indian/Native Alaskan <1%
Note: Student ethnicity is for fall 2013
Student Satisfaction
NOEL-LEVITZ STUDENT SATISFACTION INVENTORY
SURVEY RESULTS (SPRING 2013)
Spring
2013
Results
Campus
Climate
GUTTMAN
5.66
5.35
5.33
5.78
6.00
5.21
5.96
5.64
CUNY
Community
College
Average
4.87
5.12
4.85
4.90
4.85
4.76
4.77
4.92
Responsive to
Diverse
Populations
Safety
and
Security
Student
Centered
Academic
Advising
Campus
Support
Services
Concern for
the Individual
Acad.
Svcs.
Registration
Service
Excellence
5.45
5.43
5.70
4.77
5.01
4.91
Admiss. and
Fin. Aid
Benchmark Scores for Guttman on CCSSE
GEORGE KUH
At: http://nsse.iub.edu/pdf/connecting_the_dots_report.pdf
Discussion
Entering Class of 2014 Begins Summer Bridge Program
Guttman Holds First All-College Faculty-Staff Meeting
CUNY’s New Chancellor Visits Guttman
Inaugural Commencement August 27, 2014
Inaugural Commencement August 27, 2014
Inaugural Commencement August 27, 2014
September 9 – 11, 2014
Middle States Team Visit
November 20, 2014
Middle States Commission votes
to advance Guttman to Candidacy
Guttman Hosts Citizenship Now!
College Celebrates Chartering and Induction of Students
into Honor Society
‘Express Yourself’ Fashion Brings Style to Guttman
Guttman Student Wins CUNY’s 2014 Intramural Chess
Championships
Guttman Peer Mentors Attend National Mentoring
Symposium
Guttman’s Global Ambassadors Take Off for Germany
Austin Ochoa is Newest West Side Community Board Member
Pilot Program Brings Working Artists to the Classroom
College Hosts Advisory and Research Council Meeting