Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article discusses the steps taken at an urban community college in California to focus the college on a decision‐making process driven by student success. The author describes an institution‐wide activity, including many faculty, staff, and students working together to identify a series of indicators of student success. College leaders formed several “task teams” designed to measure and improve the success of students. The indicators of success included student goal attainment, course retention, success in subsequent course work, fall‐to‐fall persistence, degree / certificate completion, and placement rate in the work force. The college also worked to measure and improve the transfer rate, employer assessment of students, success after transfer, academic value added, student satisfaction, student professional growth, and student involvement. Also included in this article is a blueprint for effecting change within the institution. The steps in that process include providing a catalyst for change, causing bottom‐up change, developing a common definition of student success, communicating continually, and including large numbers of people. Early results of progress are important. Problems are to be expected, and the focus on student success must be maintained. Building a culture for student success is not significantly different from other institutional change processes. Utilizing this process to move toward greater accountability aided this college in the improvement of instruction and greater institutional effectiveness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brice W. Harris (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: