SACSCOC Off-site Committee's Response

LSU A&M does not document the strategies used to select the academic and student support units included in the report or how these units represent a valid cross-section of units at the institution. The documentation fails to substantiate a sampling strategy if one was used to address this principle.

The institution did provide a thorough review and assessment of the student support units under the Division of Student Life and Enrollment.  While the document refers to academic support units within the division of Student Life and Enrollment, no clear assessment document was provided for academic support programs. For example, advising, tutoring and Library services that were included in CS 3.4.9 are not discussed in the response to 3.3.1.3.

Furthermore, the documentation does not provide a clear understanding of the organizational levels selected for assessment outside of the Division of Student Life and Enrollment.

 

LSU A&M's Response

As requested by the Off-Site Review Committee, Louisiana State University and A&M College (LSU) is providing the following additional documentation regarding the assessment documentation and strategies of additional units, specifically those academic support programs that were included in CS 3.4.9 and that were not previously discussed in the response to CS 3.3.1.3.

Sampling of Valid Cross-Section of Units

Student support units as identified in CS 2.10 included assessment documentation for all 12 departments within the Division of Student Life and Enrollment. Additional documentation was provided for 3 of 5 departments addressed in CS 2.10 to include Communication across the Curriculum (CxC); Equity, Diversity and Community Outreach; and Health Promotions; thereby, providing a valid sample of the support services addressed in CS 2.10.

Academic Support Services, as identified in CS 3.4.9, include

(A) Tutoring,

(B) Academic Advising,

(C) Counseling/Consulting,

(D) Information Technology,

(E) Mentoring,

(F) Academic and Resources Centers,

(G) Laboratories,

(H) Special Services,

(I) Experiential Learning,

(J) Distance Learning Resources, and

(K) Libraries.

The initial compliance certificate for CS 3.3.1.3 included six of the eleven areas identified in the compliance certificate for CS 3.4.9, including Tutoring, Academic Advising, Academic and Resources Centers, Special Services, Experiential Learning, Distance Learning Resources, and  Libraries. The remaining five areas are addressed in this response.

Assessment of Academic Support Services

As stated in the off-site review report “the institution did provide a thorough review and assessment of the student support units under the Division of Student Life and Enrollment”; therefore, this response will focus on those academic support services that were not previously included. The following provides a representative sample by type of academic support as categorized in the certificate for CS 3.4.9.

TUTORING

Center for Academic Success

Tutorial services are offered primarily through the Tutorial Center in the Center for Academic Success. Student usage numbers of the Tutorial Center since Fall 2010 are represented in this chart.

Spring 2010	# of users unknown	215 respondents
Fall 2010	1665 unique students	213 respondents
Spring 2011	1398 unique students	166 respondents
Fall 2011	1765 unique students	192 respondents
Spring 2012	1398 unique students	65 respondents
Fall 2012  *	8176 surveyed	583
Spring 2013 *	8366 surveyed	323

* numbers increased due to combination of surveys.

To minimize survey fatigue, in Fall 2012, the Center for Academic Success (CAS) began a combined assessment of academic support services, including tutoring and supplemental instruction. Additionally, focus groups were facilitated in Fall Semester 2012 to address student perception of the tutorial center and tutoring services [1].

Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting from Assessment of CAS Tutoring Services

• A Spring 2010 survey found that approximately 69% of students strongly agreed or agreed that the services provided by the center helped them complete the course(s) in which they received assistance.
• Findings were used to provide feedback and suggestions for improvement to the LSU Libraries and other departments (e.g., Engineering, Sciences) that support the Tutorial Center in order to determine which services should remain and what improvements can be made [2].
• In a Fall 2010 survey, students indicated frustration with tutors lack of expertise in subject areas and with center hours. As a response, the CAS established a screening system to more clearly identify tutors’ expertise and expanded center hours to accommodate more students [3].
• A Spring 2011 survey identified the need for additional tutors. In addition, findings led CAS to consider moving from a decentralized center to more of a centralized operation. [4]
• A Fall 2011 survey revealed that approximately 69% of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that the Tutorial Center increased their understanding of course material. Results also documented students’ frustration with the limited space, number of tutors, and ability to serve students in additional courses. This feedback assisted CAS in requesting support for additional space and funding [5].
• In a Spring 2012 Tutorial Services Center Survey, overall responses from students indicated that the value of having tutoring available on an “as needed” basis to be highly beneficial. Approximately 3% mentioned that there needed to be more tutors and coverage of specific subjects that currently were not covered.
• Of the students responding to the Spring 2012 survey, approximately 50% stated that there needed to be more space and additional tutors. Students commented that there was not enough room or that the center was too crowded; therefore they could not obtain services [6].
• Fall 2012 survey data showed that 74% of students moderately or strongly agreed that “the CAS Tutorial Center increased my understanding of course material.” 67% of students moderately or strongly agreed that “I implemented strategies demonstrated by the tutors into my coursework/studying” [7].
• In a Spring 2013 survey, 70% of students moderately or strongly agreed that “the CAS Tutorial Center increased my understanding of course material.” 66% of students moderately or strongly agreed that “I implemented strategies demonstrated by the tutors into my coursework/studying” [8].
• The CAS has addressed the issue of not enough tutors by moving from a decentralized center to a centralized center in Middleton Library. With financial assistance from LSU Student Government, the center now is able to provide more tutors and to utilize their skills in multiple subjects. The influence of the results of continuous assessment and a projected increase in use over a 10-year period resulted in a tutorial center expansion in the summer of 2013.

Supplemental Instruction (SI) is also evaluated through an online survey completed by all students who attend a session.

The sample includes all students enrolled in a course section in which the Center for Academic Success (CAS) provided Supplemental Instruction Support in each given semester.

	Students surveyed	Student Respondents
Fall 2010	4150	784
Spring 2011	5617	780
Fall 2011	4394	641
Spring 2012	7365	488
Fall 2012  *	8176 surveyed	583
Spring 2013 *	8366 surveyed	323

 * numbers increased due to combination of surveys

Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting from Assessment of Supplemental Instruction

• Following the administration of the Fall 2010 survey, the CAS ensured that scheduling would avoid bringing SI sessions in conflict with each other. Furthermore, students were made aware of any schedule changes or adjustments online.
• Results from the Spring 2011 survey revealed the need for additional support for courses with high D, F, W rates. As a result, CAS pursued funding to provide this additional support.
• Based on results from the Fall 2011 survey, CAS made changes to SI leaders training format. CAS provided opportunities for SI leaders to share strategies or approaches that are successful within training sessions. CAS also met with academic deans and faculty to gauge their interests and needs.
• Based on feedback from faculty, SI leaders, and students in Spring 2012, CAS added additional courses to the SI schedule.
• CAS increased the classes offered with SI sessions greatly in Fall 2012 and Spring 2013 as a result of usage data and survey results [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14].

While tutoring is primarily provided by the Center for Academic Success through the Tutorial Center and Supplemental Instruction, student sub-populations are also served in various academic support departments including Residential Life Residential College Program, Cox Center for Student Athletes, and the Office of Multicultural Affairs.

Residential Colleges Tutoring Programs

Key Findings of 2012-2013 Data [15]

• Performance Indicator: Grades for students who sought tutoring in a math or science sequence course in spring, but not the previous fall, show improvement.
• Assessment of impact of the tutoring programs in Herget Residential College (HRC), IT Residential College (ITRC), Business Residential College (BRC), and Engineering Residential College (ERC), which began in Spring 2011 and continued through the 2012-2013 academic year. During Fall 2012, 365 different students in these four residential colleges attended tutoring sessions. The courses in which the tutoring occurred were: MATH 1021, 1022, 1023, 1431, and 1550; CHEM 1201, 1202, and 1212; and PHYS 1100.
• While the tutoring has impacted a subset of the Residential College Program (RCP) students significantly, the study guides provided tangible evidence to students in all four of the residential colleges of the academic atmosphere and support structure in the RCP. 

	HRC	ITRC	BRC	ERC	Total
Students Tutored, Fall 2012	37	46	55	132	365
Total Student Visits, Fall 2012	136	222	246	335	939
Students E-mailed  Regularly with Study Guides, Fall 2012	414	152	227	337	1130

 Key Findings of 2011-2012 Data [16]

• Performance Indicator: Grades for students who sought tutoring in a math or science sequence course in spring, but not the previous fall, show improvement.

Key Findings of 2010-2011 Data [17]

• CHEM 1201/1202 Tutoring Program in HRC and ITRC
• A measure of assessment vis-à-vis GPA data includes analysis of the impact of the chemistry tutoring programs in HRC and ITRC, which began in Spring 2011.
• The 30 HRC students who were tutored in CHEM 1201 earned a mean 3.40 in that subject (standard deviation was 0.86), compared with 129 total HRC students who completed CHEM 1201 in Fall 2010/Spring 2011 (including those 30) who earned a mean GPA of 2.96 in that subject (standard deviation was 1.25). The 3 HRC students who were tutored in CHEM 1202 earned a mean 3.67 in that subject (standard deviation was 0.58), compared with 42 total HRC students who completed CHEM 1202 in Fall 2010/Spring 2011 (including those 3), who earned a mean GPA of 2.90 in that subject (standard deviation was 0.98).
• It is noteworthy that of the three students who were tutored in CHEM 1202, the mean GPA in CHEM 1202 was 3.33, compared with 2.33 for those three students in CHEM 1201 (i.e., before they were tutored). This evidence further suggests that even if the more capable students are seeking the tutorial assistance (thereby improving their chance of earning higher GPAs than their non-tutored peers), that the tutoring is helping individual students to master the course material and enhance their own GPA. Nevertheless, caution should be exercised in the interpretation of these results because of the small sample size.
• The 9 ITRC students who were tutored in CHEM 1201 earned a mean 3.22 in that subject (standard deviation was 0.83), compared with 41 total ITRC students who completed CHEM 1201 in Fall 2010/Spring 2011 (including those 9) who earned a mean GPA of 2.93 in that subject (standard deviation was 1.25). No ITRC students sought tutoring in CHEM 1202.
• These assessment data and anecdotal evidence, as provided by dozens of student testimonial e-mails, suggest strongly that the tutoring program has had a major positive impact. Future initiatives in tutoring must consider a policy on tutoring for non-RCP students.

Cox Communication Academic Center for Student Athletes (CCACSA)

Sample: Students and staff who serve as tutors for the Cox Center for Athletes and student athletes using the tutorial services (Completed survey: 2010: 95; 2011: 84; 2012: 55; 2013: 82)

	Students and staff Respondents
2010	95
2011	84
2012	55
2013	82

 Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting from Assessment

• The Tutor Evaluation Assessment is given to tutors at the end of each semester to gauge the efficiency of the CCACSA Tutorial Program and tutor satisfaction.  Several changes were implemented based on answers to the fall 2012 survey’s open-ended feedback questions.
• Consistent trends in the answers to the open-ended questions include complaints of too few training sessions, of training that focused more on day-to day procedural duties more than tutor strategies, and of lack of access to information after training.
• In response to the feedback, changes were made. In fall 2012, the CCACSA held compliance trainings three times a semester.  The information is repetitive but critical to adhering to NCAA and SEC protocol with student athletes.  After the survey, the unit changed the frequency to two required trainings and instituted a compliance checkpoint quiz midway through the semester as a post-test to make sure that the integrity of the compliance training continued.
• CCACSA reduced the number of College Reading and Learning Association's (CRLA) training meetings (with the number of meeting hours remaining the same). The unit will also utilize other multimedia training methods to make the training more interactive and more useful. 
• CCACSA created a tutor-shared drive and a tutor manual.  The tutors have constant access to most of the information they need.  The unit is in the process of creating “ACSA Tutorials” that will outline some of the procedures and processes. As these tutorials are created, they are placed on the tutor-shared drive where tutors can access them as needed [18] [19].

Genesis Tutoring

Genesis Tutoring is evaluated through a pre/post test paper survey and monitoring usage data.

 Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting from Assessment

• In the post-test assessment, students agreed that their tutoring needs were fulfilled through Genesis Tutoring. Statements from open-ended response included “It was an encouraging [session]” and “Yes, but it was hard to understand my tutor sometimes” along with “Yes, she took her time and explained the topic to me.”
• As a result of the data from the pre-post survey of Genesis Tutoring, additional space was carved out in the Office of Multicultural Affairs to ease the noise level and to promote oral teaching and practice [20].

SMARTTHINKING Online Tutoring

Online Tutoring is offered through a service called SMARTHINKING in subject areas including writing, reading, math, basic math, business, science, Spanish, computers and technology.

Student Sample: The 2007 student sample of 847 included all students who used the online tutoring service SMARTTHINKING, with 115 respondents.

Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting from Assessment

• On a scale of 1 - 5 (where 1 is not helpful and 5 is extremely helpful), 71% of respondents rated SMARTHINKING tutoring at 4 or 5 on the scale.
• 81% of students noted that they would like to see this service continue to be offered to students. 8% thought the service should not be continued and 11% were unsure.
• Results of this survey validated the continued investment in offering online tutoring through SMARTTHINKING.
• Results were also provided to the vendor that helped them improve their services. [21] [22].

ACADEMIC ADVISING

Academic advising/consulting/counseling is decentralized and located within each of the academic colleges. A sample of five of the ten academic colleges’ assessment of academic advising is included below.

LSU uses the National Survey on Student Engagement (NSSE) as a university-wide assessment of various institutional functions, including academic advising. LSU participated in NSSE in 2003 and 2004, and began a two-year cycle of administering the NSSE in 2007, with continued participation in 2009, 2011, and 2013.  

The NSSE changed radically in 2013. Prior to 2011 there was no question that specifically addressed interaction with advisors; however, it included questions that allowed students to provide open-ended information regarding their experiences at the institution. In 2013, the question asked, “How do you rate the quality of your interaction with academic advisors?” 

LSU’s freshmen compare closely, 65% vs. 66%, to our Carnegie Peers with respect to high satisfaction with their advisors. Further, those who rated their advisors as “poor” are identical at 4%.  This trend carries through to the seniors, with 64% of both our seniors and their Carnegie peer counterparts being satisfied with their advising. The percentage of LSU students who responded “poor” was 6% as compared to 5% among Carnegie peers. [23] [24]

Analysis of freshman data showing progression of percent of answers in the top two categories (“Quite a bit,” “Very much”) in chronological order from 2007-2013 indicates growth in satisfaction of our freshmen with advising and also shows over the past six years LSU drawing even with, and eventually slightly surpassing, Carnegie peers in satisfaction with freshmen advising.

Analysis of data for seniors showing progression of percent of answers in the top two categories in chronological order from 2007-2013 indicates growth in satisfaction with advising as they also catch, and eventually slightly surpass, their Carnegie peers in 2013.   

University College

Advising for the majority of first year students at LSU is provided through the University Center for Freshman Year in University College.  University College has utilized assessment for continuous improvement of programs and services, and implemented changes based on assessment results. Below are examples of evidence of improvement based on analysis of assessment results.

Sample: Students who attend one-on-one academic advising appointments in UCFY. (Sample = 8170; Respondents = 1559)

Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting From Assessment

• For the academic year 2012-2013,  92% “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that “UCFY’s program assisted me in a professional and friendly manner”;  91% “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that “the counselor was able to assist me in resolving my situation or referred me to someone who may be able to assist me”; 90% “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that “the counselor was knowledgeable of all services offered by the center and of LSU’s policies”; 89% “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that “I would be inclined to visit the center for assistance in the future”; and 88% rated the center and the services provided as “excellent” or “good.”
• For the academic year 2012-2013 (fall and spring semesters only), University College’s Center for Advising and Counseling advised 4,073 students as face-to-face contacts.  UCAC student evaluations totaled 780 responses, with the following results:  95% “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that “UCAC’s program assisted me in a professional and friendly manner”; 93% “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that “the counselor was able to assist me in resolving my situation or referred me to someone who may be able to assist me”; 94% “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that “the counselor was knowledgeable of all services offered by the center and of LSU’s policies”; 93% “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that “I would be inclined to visit the center for assistance in the future”; and 88% rated the center and the services provided as “excellent” or “good” [25].

College of Agriculture

Academic Advising Services, offered through the College of Agriculture, are evaluated through survey questions included on the LSU Graduating Student Survey. 

Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting from Assessment

• Over the course of three years, results from the Graduating Student Survey have remained relatively steady in regards to students’ satisfaction with academic advising. According to those results, 69% of students said their academic advising needs were met always or often by their departmental advisor in Spring 2013, 73% in Fall 2012, 75% in Spring 2012, 71% in Fall 2011, and 77% in Spring 2011.
• Data in the graduating student survey is shared with all units. One change made in the college is collecting business cards of all faculty advisors in order to streamline referrals [26] [27] [28] [29] [30].

College of Art and Design

Academic Advising Services offered through the College of Art and Design are evaluated through exit interviews with graduating seniors (Each May, the Dean and Associate Dean meet with a sampling of graduating students from each of the four units within the College.) Feedback provided to the units as appropriate and is used to improve student support services offered by the college.  As a result of data collected in 2011, advisors implemented “Advising Nights” to reach additional students and accommodate student schedules [31].

College of Humanities and Social Sciences (CHSS)

Academic Advising Services offered through the College of Humanities and Social Sciences are evaluated through a paper survey offered to students following an appointment with an academic counselor.

Survey results are used to ensure that the CHSS is doing what is necessary to assist students in a positive and impactful way. Changes are made as a result of careful interpretation of the data. Results also are used in evaluation of academic counselors and, specifically, to provide feedback regarding immediate issues associated with a specific counselor. They also are included in the counselor’s annual evaluation. Additionally, results are used at weekly staff meetings to address big-picture issues. [32]

College of Human Sciences and Education (CHSE)

Academic Advising Services offered through the College of Human Sciences and Education are evaluated through an online Survey sent out via email following student advising appointments.  As a result of steady student number growth over the last 10 years from a student population of approximately 1200 students to our current undergraduate population of approximately 2000 students, the CHSE began implementing “service satisfaction surveys” to all students who completed an appointment  beginning in November of 2012.

Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting from Assessment

• Data showed that some students had to wait sometimes 5 to 10 minutes or more after their appointment times in order to be seen.  The counselors’/advisors’ appointment time was set at 15 minutes. 
• CHSE changed to 30-minute appointments to better suit the needs of the students as well as the advisors.  The increase in appointment time allows more students to be seen at their scheduled time and provides more time for the counselor/advisor to take care of all of the students’ needs in one visit.
• The results are discussed at CHSE regular staff meetings to determine how to better serve students.  Results are discussed and possible solutions to problems are contemplated and put into place as deemed appropriate.
• Group advising meetings for different student majors were implemented after the number of juniors that the Department of Kinesiology Department required to be advised prior to scheduling grew so large that counselors did not have sufficient appointment times to meet the scheduling period deadline.  These group advising meetings were so successful that it was decided to offer more group meetings to other majors, including students majoring in PK3 students [33].

Graduating Student Survey

Graduating students complete an exit survey administered by Career Services that provides student feedback in a variety of areas. Included are opportunities for students to report open-ended feedback regarding their academic advising experience. Results are shared with the academic colleges, and each college utilizes results for change and improvement [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39].

LSU LIBRARIES

The LSU Libraries is committed to tracking and evaluating a wide variety of metrics and statistics that provide a solid foundation for assessment and decision-making. The Libraries regularly tracks serial and database usage data, circulation data, gate count, reference transactions, and instruction sessions. The Libraries use this information to assess its collection and services and to adjust to the changing needs of the university.

The assessment of instruction in the Libraries is accomplished in several ways. The Libraries one-credit instruction course, LIS 1001, uses a pre-/post-test mechanism to assess students’ learning of information literacy skills. The Libraries’ instruction committee modifies the content of the course as needed. The Libraries also provide one-time instruction for students at the request of faculty members. These 45-60 minute instructional activities are assessed by use of an online form that allows students to provide feedback about the session. The Libraries also has online tutorials for students with embedded feedback forms.

The following are examples of changes implemented because of the LSU Libraries assessment activities.

Serials Survey and Assessment

Approximately every five years, LSU Libraries administers a serials-needs assessment survey to faculty. At the request of the Libraries, faculty submit lists of ranked serial titles deemed essential for their research or teaching. The last serial survey was completed in spring 2009.

WebFeat Evaluation Leading to EBSCO Discovery Service

In an effort to provide an easier, more comprehensive and effective searching experience for patrons, in 2006 LSU Libraries initiated a subscription to a new federated search program called WebFeat, which would search all of the databases for which WebFeat was paid to set up a connection.

WebFeat and other federated search engines were a step in the right direction, but eventually proved to be inadequate to the task because of the slow speed at which searches were conducted. After several years of trying to fine-tune the program, the Libraries cancelled its subscription in 2009.

At the same time, next generation systems were being developed on the market to perform similar functions. LSU Libraries monitored these developments, and in 2012 procured EBSCO’s Discovery System.

In fall of 2012 the Libraries fully deployed the EBSCO Discovery System and has spent the past year fine-tuning it. Initial anecdotal responses through reference librarian interactions with patrons as well as classroom use by librarians have been very good and very encouraging. The new generation search systems are providing the more comprehensive, easier, Google-style searching that patrons seem to want. More formal evaluations of this system will be implemented in the academic year 2012-2013; usage data continues to be monitored.

Print Approval Plan repurposed to e-DDA model

During fiscal year 2012 the LSU Libraries evaluated the process of purchasing print monographs within the set parameters of collection development’s Approval Plan. The decision was made to repurpose and adapt the Approval Plan to include electronic books through a new business model which allows for point-of-need access called e-DDA, or electronic demand-driven acquisition. E-books can either be “borrowed” as a short-term loan with a small fee (paid by the Libraries) or purchased by the Libraries for a larger cost.

The electronic demand-driven acquisition model contains its own assessment and feedback mechanism. Items are purchased based directly on the amount of use they receive from faculty, staff, and students. Insufficient use = no purchase; enough use to effect a “trigger” (based on multiple criteria) = one short-term loan (paid); two short-term loans = one purchase. The initial success of this program caused the Libraries to expand the FY2012 pilot of science e-books only to a program incorporating e-books in the social sciences as well. The e-DDA model has greatly reduced the Libraries’ book expenditures, while providing an increased number of titles to which full-text access is available.

Tracking ILB requests for purchase recommendations

The Libraries’ Interlibrary Borrowing unit and subject liaisons track and assess data generated by faculty, staff, and students when requests are made to borrow materials not owned or accessible at LSU. In fall 2011 additional fields were added to the Interlibrary Borrowing submission form (Illiad) asking patrons if they recommend the Libraries purchase the material requested for borrowing [40].  All purchase recommendations are then sent from ILB to subject liaisons to review and make final purchasing decisions [41].

Implementing a new document delivery service

In February 2012 Interlibrary Borrowing (ILB) launched a pilot project to test their ability to offer document delivery services.  ILB staff scanned and electronically delivered articles and book chapters owned only in print and Middleton Library. The pilot project lasted about one year and it became an official service for faculty and staff in January 2013, as the workload was deemed manageable with existing staff. [42]

After the success of the faculty and staff pilot, ILB decided to launch another pilot for graduate students in January 2013 and the advertising strategy was very similar to the faculty and staff pilot.  The number of requests we received for Document Delivery increased tremendously [43], but response to the service was also extremely positive, especially from students researching off campus or working full-time jobs while going to school [44]. In July of 2013, the Libraries officially expanded the service to graduate students. 

Organizational Units Selected for Assessment beyond the Division of Student Life and Enrollment

Requests for information were made to representatives within academic colleges and units that support student success as part of their primary mission, yet do not report to the Division of Student Life and Enrollment. The units included in the initial compliance certificate for CS 3.3.1.3 were those who self-reported assessment efforts in the pursuit of offering and strengthening academic and student support services. Additionally, the first certificate focused on the student life and academic support units that had been addressed in CR 2.10.

Additional information regarding assessment of the other academic support areas identified in the compliance certificate for CS 3.4.9 is included below. The addendum includes samples of assessment of Counseling/Consulting, Information Technology, Mentoring, Academic & Resource Centers, Laboratories, Special Services, Experiential Learning, and Distance Learning.

COUNSELING/CONSULTING

Various forms of counseling and consulting are offered throughout the institution. Learning strategies consultations are offered through the Center for Academic Success. Counseling/ consulting is centralized in terms of mental health counseling within the Student Health Center and career counseling within Career Services.

Center for Academic Success Learning strategies consultations are evaluated through online Survey following the consultation.

Individual Consultation Survey at the Center for Academic Success (CAS)

	Students surveyed	Student Respondents
Spring 2011	189	38
Fall 2011	344	57
Spring 2012	73	33
Fall 2012	163	35

 Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting from Assessment:

• From the Spring 2011 results, CAS staff improved strategies for marketing services. As part of this improvement, staff identified and implemented ways to reinforce all services that are available through CAS and LSU [45].
• Fall 2011 survey resulted in CAS staff adding consulting staff with Social Work Graduate Assistants to accommodate more students. CAS staff also implemented additional online programming and workshops [46].
• In the Spring 2012 survey, approximately 94% of students said that their CAS experience either “met” or “exceeded” their expectations. In addition, approximately 67% of students indicated that their CAS experience influenced their self-perception of their abilities and confidence to excel in school either “a great deal” or “considerably” [47].
• As a result of the Fall 2012 survey, CAS staff improved marketing of services to the general population and developed online video to assist students in understanding the process and value of meeting one-on-one with a consultant [48].

Career Counseling

This service is evaluated through an online Survey following a career decision-making (i.e. career counseling) appointment.

Career Decision-Making Post-Appointment Survey- included all students participating in individual career decision counseling appointments offered by Career Services

	Students surveyed	Student Respondents
2011-2012	unknown	257
2012-2013	unknown	213

 Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting from Assessment

• Based on the results of the 2011 – 2012 administration of the survey, Career Services staff began following up with students at the end of each appointment with questions that clarified students’ next steps [49].
• Results from the 2012 – 2013 administration of the survey led to Career Services staff making adjustments to include students and counselors working together to ensure follow-up steps were met [50].

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

Information Technology is regularly assessed through a variety of ways, including surveys and the monitoring of usage data.

Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting From Assessment

• In 2009, Moodle became the institution’s single learning management system (LMS), replacing Blackboard and the home-grown SemesterBook system, as a direct result of planning and governance, utilizing data from Needs Assessment Survey for both faculty and students.
• During Spring 2013, 74.8% of faculty were actively using Moodle for 75.1% of all undergraduate course sections. Over 96% of all undergraduates are using Moodle. The utilization rates for both Blackboard and SemesterBook combined did not break 50%, denoting a significant increase in LMS usage [51] [52] [53].

MENTORING

Tiger Transition Team

Tiger Transition Team Mentor/Mentee Evaluation Survey

	Mentors surveyed	Mentor Respondents	Mentees surveyed	Mentee Respondents
Fall 2010	232	82	387	107
Fall 2011	155	38
Spring 2012			275	12

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting from Assessment

• The Fall 2010 administration of the Tiger Transition Mentor and Mentee Evaluations was used to establish a baseline. Following this initial administration, the survey was administered on a semester rotation.
• In the initial assessment, mentors suggested that First Year Experience (FYE) staff ensure that mentees were committed to the program from the beginning. As a result, FYE staff began following up with mentees via e-mail, after they signed up, to confirm their participation. Mentee responses resulted in FYE staff increasing the number of events and activities [54] [55].
• Results from the Fall 2011 survey indicated that mentors maintained contact with mentees mostly via text and email. In addition, feedback suggested that more major and career-specific programs were desired. As a result, FYE staff increased the number of academic events and activities [56].
• Spring 2012 results indicated that mentees desired more personal interactions with each other. As a result, FYE staff implemented more opportunities that allowed mentees and mentors to interact with each other in small group settings [57].

ACADEMIC AND RESOURCE CENTERS

Academic and Resource Centers, as identified in the compliance certificate for CS 3.4.9, include services offered through a variety of offices throughout the LSU Campus. Below is a sampling of assessment data from three academic and resource centers.

Communication across the Curriculum (CxC)

The sample includes students and faculty participating in Communications-Intensive (C-I) courses.

Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting from Assessment

• Data Collection: Multiple assessment measures are in place to evaluate the impact of C-I courses on students’ communication skills, including formative and summative assessment of course communication projects, student and faculty surveys gauging the impact of C-I courses, and departmental assessments of student learning and of students’ communication skills. 
• Assessment findings:  Since Fall 2006, CxC has used written surveys to collect opinions of students enrolled in C-I courses.  Data (through 2010) indicate that 56% (n=4,601) consider that their C-I courses improved their communication skills, and 66% (n=4,596) believe they will continue to use the communication skills they have acquired.  Additionally, CxC has collected opinions of faculty who teach C‐I courses.   Responses have remained consistent over time.  For example, the 2009 survey (response rate, 72%) revealed that, with regard to each mode, more than 90% (n=80) of C‐I faculty believe their students’ communication skills improved noticeably by the end of the C‐I course.  In addition, 86% (n=80) agree that their students gained a greater understanding of course content because of C‐I activities.  The survey also showed that 93% (n=77) indicated that course content was not compromised to meet C‐I requirements.
• Individual departments also report differences between student performance in C-I and non-CI courses.  For example, in a recent outcomes assessment of students in six different 4000-level courses, faculty of the Department of Communication Studies randomly selected 28 student papers and rated them on a three-point scale (0=inadequate, 1=adequate, 2=superior) to gauge how well students mastered five specific learning outcomes.  The mean (M) for students in C-I courses was higher than that for non-C-I courses on every measure, including “demonstrates an understanding of concepts” (C-I M=1.77; non C-I M=1.32) and “demonstrates critical thinking and argumentation skills” (C-I M = 1.72; non C-I M= 1.26).  From the chemistry department comes another example. Typically three sections of Chemistry 1202 are offered each fall; one section has been periodically taught using C-I methodologies.  All students take an identical comprehensive final exam; those from the C-I section have consistently scored 10% higher.  The C-I section also has had a lower drop rate (10%) than the other sections (average, 35%). 
• Changes implemented as a result of assessment: Because data indicates that students improve their communication skills in C-I courses, CxC staff makes a concerted effort to recruit faculty members to offer certified classes, a challenge made more difficult recently as budget shortfalls have forced increases in class size [58].  (C-I courses generally have a faculty to student ratio of 35:1 to allow for one-on-one feedback.)

Disability Services

Disability Services provides/coordinates a wide of array of accommodations and services for students with disabilities including note taking, alternative format text and other materials, accommodative testing, interpreting and captioning, etc.  Disability Services utilizes tracking data.

Data on # of Students Served by Disability Services

Year	# of Students Served	% Increase Over Previous Year
2011	1300	8.20%
2012	1426	9.69%
2013	1596	11.92%

 Data on # of Exams Proctored in Disability Services

Year	# of Exams Proctored	% Increase Over Previous Year
2011	6428	31.13%
2012	7493	16.57%
2013	8850	18.11%

 

Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting From Assessment

• As a result of usage data showing an increase in numbers of students served and number of exams proctored, Disability Services worked with numerous departments on campus to increase the capacity to proctor exams during our highest volumes times (specifically Fall and Spring final exams). 
• Additionally, Disability Services has added 14 additional permanent computer-based testing stations in order to meet the ever evolving testing needs of students.

Residential Colleges

Sample: The student sample included all students who lived in a residential college hall.

Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting From Assessment

• In the past five years the percentage of residential college students has grown from 42% to 57%. The growth of these residential colleges is in support of the university’s goal to increase retention from the first to second year. 
• The data indicate that, while the overall retention rate for LSU students from first to second year in 2011-2012 was 83%, the rate for those in residential colleges was 85.7%.  
• As a result, in the past five years, additional residential colleges have been added, including  Mass Communication, Agriculture, Science, Business, Engineering, and IT [59] [60] [61].

LABORATORIES

Laboratories are regularly assessed through the tracking and feedback data. A sample of two laboratories at LSU is included below.

Communication across the Curriculum Studio (Laboratories)

The Communication across the Curriculum Studios across campus are equipped with state-of-the-art technology and highly-skilled communication advisors. Tracking usage numbers in laboratories is used to assess effectiveness and need.

Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting from Assessment

• As a result of continuous increase over the course of tracking 14 semesters, CxC added a full-time science coordinator to mentor students in Studio 151 who are working on scientific posters and papers. [62]

Computer Aided Design & Geographic Information Systems (CADGIS) Computer Lab

The CADGIS Computer Lab is assessed through exit interviews with graduating seniors. Each May, the dean and associate dean meet with a sampling of graduating students (grad and undergrad) within the College of Art and Design, the primary users of the CADGIS Lab.

Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting from Assessment

• As a result of feedback in May 2012 identifying challenges with students understanding of how to use the lab, the CADGIS Lab manager included more workshops to educate students on the equipment.
• Feedback in May 2008 identified challenges with printing in the CADGIS Lab being too restrictive based on closing times. As a result, the CADGIS Lab switched to be 24 hours after funding was obtained in the 2009/10 year, with slight improvements made during the 2010/11 year. In the May 2013 feedback, students identified the 24 hour access as a strength of the CADGIS Lab [31].

SPECIAL SERVICES

Below is a sample of one of the special services identified in the compliance certificate for CS 3.4.9.

IMPACT Assessment

Sample: The student sample included all students who participated in the IMPACT program. (2010 survey: 127 = Sample, 38 = Respondents; 2011-2013 quantitative data comparison).

Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting from Assessment

• CAS made changes to the IMPACT program after a formative assessment (teaching) was given at the end of the workshop, with a formative (learning) assessment two-to-four weeks after, and a summative (learning) at the end of the semester.   
• Initial assessments of teaching were positive.  Approximately 70% of students responding stated that the activities and quizzes included in the workshop were helpful; however, approximately 25% stated that they would like more “hands-on” opportunities and interactions during the workshop. 
• Self-reported academic confidence was improved.  On a scale from 1-10, students ranked their overall confidence between 4-5 before IMPACT and 7-8 after IMPACT learning assessment.
• Fifty-one out of 70 student users (73%) reported improved grades, better time management, and improved study habits (e.g., attending class, reading more, listening to lectures, studying in advance) after IMPACT learning assessment. Students on academic warning or probation who attended IMPACT obtained at least a .5 GPA increase over those who chose not to attend (same group).
• The workshop continues to grow with more sessions for students to attend, incorporating more “hands-on” activities to engage students in understanding how to transition more effectively.  Total students served in 2010 were 64.  In 2011, CAS served 487 students (included all first-year students). 
• Results indicated the high value of the IMPACT program, thus leading CAS to make the IMPACT program mandatory in the Spring 2013 to all first-year students who were placed on academic probation or warning (received less than a 2.0 GPA) by the university. Additional workshop sessions were added by CAS to accommodate additional students [63] [4] [65] [66].

EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING

Experiential Learning, as identified in the compliance certificate for CS 3.4.9, consists of service-learning (S-L) through the Center for Community Engagement Learning and Leadership (CCELL)

Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting From Assessment.

• CCELL uses a student assessment of S-L courses; an assessment of the faculty scholars program (in which CCELL teaches faculty how to integrate S-L into their courses); an S-L designation process, which requires assessment of the course by a committee of faculty and community partner experts (once every 5 years); and a community partner survey (done every 1-2 years). CCELL assesses the impact of S-L designated courses on students through a survey [67] given in each S-L class and on the community partners through another survey [68]. The data are reviewed every semester. Results are returned to the faculty members to allow them to reflect on the assessment and make appropriate changes as needed. For the three highest evaluations at the university, a congratulatory letter is sent to the faculty member and his or her dean; for any S-L course that does not score well on the survey, an individual direct follow-up with the faculty, which includes a problem-solving session, occurs to help the faculty member improve the experience for the students or for the community partner. LSU students report that service-learning enhanced understanding of course content (75%), improved leadership skills (80%), and increased the likelihood of future community involvement (77%). Surveys also assess how well CCELL supports faculty and community partners; results inform the center’s programming and services.
• The LSU Community Engagement Advisory Council [69], composed of faculty, administrators, and community partners, and CCELL implemented a new faculty-driven process for designating S-L classes in fall 2012 [70]. CCELL also offers the Faculty Scholars Program [71] to encourage the development of S-L curricula that will have a lasting impact on instruction, promote the institutionalization of service-learning courses in every department, and advance the educational and engagement objectives of the LSU Flagship Agenda. The results of a recent survey of faculty within this program provided impetus for changes in the program curriculum. For example, one suggestion (based on comments of scholars via survey, and suggested by more than one scholar) included “less background reading,” which prompted a consideration of the total amount of outside work requested for the program seminar. CCELL decided to balance the scholars’ request for less reading with the importance of each reading assignment and, as a result, removed several reading assignments from the curriculum. Scholars also suggested that they would like more interaction with community partners and faculty who had on-going service-learning partnerships; thus, faculty and community partner discussion panels were added to the seminar series.

DISTANCE LEARNING RESOURCES AND ACADEMIC SUPPORT

Online Student Services

LSU offers instruction via multiple modalities. Online instruction involves (1) students in and around the Baton Rouge area taking some, or all, courses online and (2) students outside of the geographical area who are completely enrolled and access all services online. Students have access to a wide range of services regardless of the modality in which the course is delivered, including orientation materials and online tutorials regarding learning styles. A needs and satisfaction survey that was implemented to allow students in the LSU Online program to provide feedback to the university included assessment of needs as related to students experience with academic resources for distance learning. Below is a select summary of those results.

Sample: The sample included all students enrolled in the LSU Online program (Sample = 45; Respondents = 26) and was administered Spring 2013.

Key Finding(s) and/or Change(s) Resulting from Assessment

• Students from the four programs included in the LSU Online degree programs completed an online survey regarding their current experiences with LSU and future needs related to services for student support.
• Overall students in the LSU Online program have had positive experiences with the university and its services: 85% of students agree, either strongly or somewhat, that “LSU is welcoming to online students.”  Similarly, 81% agree that “the tuition I pay is worth the educational experience I am having at LSU.”
• In regard to student issues, 85% of students agree that “I am able to resolve any problems I experience at LSU in a timely manner,” and 78% agree that “when I have questions, it is easy to get answers or the information that I need from LSU staff members.”  Approximately 67% of students agree that “there are appropriate channels at LSU for expressing student complaints and concerns.”
• Students also communicated their satisfaction through this survey: 87% identified that they are very or somewhat satisfied with the “quality of academic courses in your major,” and 77% were satisfied with the “availability of faculty.”
• On other topics, 63% of students said that LSU has met or exceeded their expectations, and 81% identified that they would recommend the LSU Online program to others.
• Of the students services offered through Student Life & Enrollment, students identified the following services as not important or not needed for online students: Campus Life, Greek Life, Parent and Family Programs, Residential Life, and University Recreation.  Students identified the following services as slightly, moderately, or very important to online students: Career Services, Center for Academic Success, Disability Services, Enrollment Management, Orientation, and the Student Financial Management Center [72].

SMARTTHINIKING Online tutoring available for distance education students is referenced in the beginning of this response in association with tutoring provided by the institution.