Transcript PEMSA Division Meeting Spring 2014 February 12, 2014 Lori Varlotta Senior Vice President for Planning, Enrollment Management and Student Affairs.

PEMSA Division Meeting
Spring 2014
February 12, 2014
Lori Varlotta
Senior Vice President for Planning, Enrollment
Management and Student Affairs
Overview
• State Budget and Its Implications for CSU and
Sacramento State
•
•
•
•
California’s Emerging Funding Model
Advising-Related Programs
Graduation Initiative (GI)-Related Programs
Co-Curricular Programs
• Capital Planning Updates
• Housing Expansion
• Union/WELL Expansion
• Lassen Hall Updates
State Budget and Its Implications for
CSU and Sacramento State
Summary of Governor’s
Proposed Budget
Governor Brown’s 2014-15 proposed budget
calls for increases in CSU funding.
• $142M increase for CSU system in 2014-15
• 5% general fund increase to CSU for next two
years (4% in the two following years)
The proposal also includes grant incentives to
increase graduation rates and reduce time-todegree rates.
California’s Emerging Funding Model
California, like other states, is considering a
move away from enrollment-based funding
toward a performance-based model. Such a
model might include metrics such as:
•
•
•
•
•
Affordability
Efficiency
Timely Completion of Degree
Aggregated and Disaggregated Graduation Rates
Ease of Transfer
California’s Emerging
Funding Model (cont.)
If California moves in that direction, both
the CSU and Sac State have programs
such as Advising, the Graduation
Initiative (GI), and others that might move
the needle forward.
Sac State’s Advising-Related Programs
The Connection Between
Advising & Student Success
The data collected in many of the
University’s established advising-related
programs suggests that there is a strong
correlation between the intrusive advising
offered in “specialty” programs and
student success.
• Student-Athlete Resource Center (SARC)
• Second-Year Advising (SYA)
Student-Athlete Resource Center (SARC)
(8 years in existence)
The SARC serves Sac State’s ~500 intercollegiate
student-athletes. Data shows SARC programs & services
contribute to the academic success of its students.
• Student-athletes’ first-year retention rate (88%) is
higher than that of the overall student population (81%)
• In Fall 2012, student-athletes had a 2.94 average GPA
(overall undergrad GPA = 2.86)
• The Fall 2006-2007 freshman student-athlete cohort
had a 61% graduation rate (overall undergrad = 41%)
Second-Year Advising (SYA)
(5 years in existence)
The SYA program serves students who are on academic
probation or “at-risk.” Support services include:
• Mandatory 1½ hours of intervention
• Initial 1 hour meeting
• ½ hour follow-up meeting
• Study skills
• Course planning
• Goal planning
• Time management
• Degree progress
After receiving services, students in the SYA program showed an
average GPA increase of 0.3 grade points in one semester.
Second-Year Advising:
Moving the Needle
100%
Status in
Students’
Third Year
90%
80%
70%
60%
Withdrew
DQ/DM
Probation
Good Standing
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2001
2002
2003
Comparison Cohorts
2009
2010
2011
2012
Academic Advising
In addition to advising programs that have
been in place for years, new ones are being
conceptualized this year to “scale up”
programs that worked in the past.
• A Transfer Student Advising Program is being
piloted this spring to parallel, in some part,
what is offered to freshmen in first-year
advising.
• A Residential Student Advising Program is also
being piloted this spring to augment the
existing second-year probation program.
Transfer Student Advising
(Piloted Spring 2014)
• Initial target: undeclared transfer students admitted
for AY 2013-2014
• Mandatory academic advising
• GE/GR
• Course planning
•
•
•
•
Strategies for academic success
Transitioning from community college
Campus and community resources
Connecting with other transfer students
Residential Student Advising
(Piloted Spring 2014)
• Target: residential students on academic
probation
• 189 first-year students
• Multiple advising sessions
• RLC training began last semester
• 7 RLCs
• 1 Residential Academic Advisor
Graduation Initiative (GI)-Related Programs
Goals of the GI
• Increase the six-year graduation rate of
Sacramento State’s FTF from 42% to 51%
by 2015.
• Increase the four-year graduation rate of
Sacramento State’s transfer students from
63% to 68% by 2015.
• Close the Sacramento State achievement
gap by half by 2015. The current gap is
• ~10.3% for FTF
• ~5.2% for Transfer Students
A Key Strategy to Meet GI Goals
Scale “what works” with small groups such as
EOP, CAMP, and PARC to the larger student
population.
Since “specialty” programs that offer intensive
advising, mentoring, and academic support
(tutoring, etc.) work for their specific
audiences, the GI aims to expand such
services to reach more of the general student
body.
Educational Opportunity Program (EOP)
(45 years in existence)
EOP serves first-generation students from lowincome or traditionally underrepresented
backgrounds.
According to a 2012 OIR study, EOP
participants had slightly higher rates of
retention than non-participants in both Spring
and Fall 2011, in spite of the fact that they had
significantly lower average HS GPAs and SAT
scores than non-EOP first-generation FTF
students.
College Assistance Migrant Program (CAMP)
(32 years in existence)
CAMP supports ~80 migrant students per year.
According to a 2012 study, the first- to secondyear retention rate for CAMP participants was
significantly higher than that of non-CAMP
students with similar backgrounds in Fall 2011
(92.6% vs. 82.3%).
The 6-year graduation rate was 40%—slightly
higher than URMs not served by SASEEP.
Peer & Academic Resource Center (PARC)
(2.5 years in existence)
In Fall 2011, PARC was launched in an effort
to centralize many academic support services.
Students can stop by or make an appointment
to see a tutor, get assistance on a paper, meet
with a peer advisor, or take advantage of
courses that offer a supplemental instruction
component.
Supplemental Instruction (SI)
(34 years in existence)
Supplemental Instruction, conducted through
PARC, is a 1-unit support course for students
enrolled in historically challenging general
education (GE) courses (e.g., Biology,
Chemistry, Economics, History, and more).
In Fall 2009, SI efforts were scaled up to serve
more students across a variety of disciplines.
SI (cont.)
Student participants in SI have repeatedly earned better
grades than non-SI participants in the same or similar GE
courses.
Additionally, SI students outperformed non-participants in terms
of the course passage rate in numerous instances.
DEGREES
(3 months in existence)
Funded this fall through a CO grant, the
DEGREES program—“Dedicated to Educating,
Graduating, and Retaining Educational Equity
Students”—is designed to help close the
achievement gap by getting URM students
involved in high impact programs such as:
• Online mentoring services (Mutual Force)
• Online tutoring 24 hours a day (Smarthinking)
• Early warning interventions through the EBI MAP
Works Platform
DEGREES (cont.)
The DEGREES Project proposes to scale up
services to underrepresented populations not
served by an equity program.
• Rationale:
• The Federal government definition of URM is a
narrow one (African-American, non-white Latino,
API, and Native American).
• DEGREES targets all underrepresented
students, not only those defined as URM.
Co-Curricular Programs
Greek Life
Last year, Student Organizations & Leadership
offered a $1,000 incentive to the fraternity that
most improved its GPA.
• 16 fraternities competed for the $1,000.
• 12 of 16 groups improved their GPAs.
• The 12 groups improved their GPAs by an
average of .07 points in one semester.
• 167 individual students improved their GPAs in
that one semester.
Student Club Leaders
High impact practices in the co-curricular/ student
involvement arena, such as being a club leader, are
correlated with student success (OIR, 2011).
• Improved 4-year and 6-year graduation rates
• Improved retention rates
On the Horizon
Though the performance-based funding model
has just emerged on the California horizon, it
is important to know that both existing and
emerging programs associated with advising,
the GI, and co-curricular activities may well
position Sac State to meet the forthcoming
metrics in this area.
PEMSA Capital Planning Updates
Housing Expansion
Feasibility Study for
Housing & Residential Life
• An outside consultant’s two Student Housing
Feasibility Studies (2006 and 2011) indicate that
student demand is such that Sacramento State could
viably increase the number of beds on campus.
• The studies recommended that Sac State upgrade its
on-campus housing in two building phases and
renovate existing buildings over a multi-year period.
Study Recommendations
• Add 600 beds, predominantly student/suite-apartments to
open in Fall 2009 (American River Courtyard).
• Undertake phased modernization of existing residence
halls over 5 years.
• Add 1,557 new beds in phases between 2012 and 2021.
New Construction: Phase 1
Construction of the American River Courtyard (ARC)
•
•
•
•
Opened in 2009
Attractive & modern facility
606 beds, predominantly suite-style apartments
2 bedroom/2 bathroom with common living and
kitchenette areas or 5 single bedrooms with the same
common living and kitchenette areas
With the addition of the American River Courtyard, student
housing was increased by 56%
Renovation of Existing Halls
Completed Renovations:
• Dining Commons (Summer 2012): seating space area was
modernized
• Sierra Hall (Summer 2012) and Sutter Hall (Summer 2013):
general refurbishment (i.e., system upgrades/replacement and
cosmetic improvements) plus structural changes to the first floor
restrooms
Planned Renovations:
• Draper Hall (Summer 2014) and Jenkins Hall (Summer 2015):
General Refurbishment (i.e., system upgrades/replacement and
cosmetic improvements)
o These are the two oldest buildings, built in 1959 in the traditional style
of that era—cinderblock with double-loaded corridors and community
restrooms on each wing
New Construction: Phase 2
Construction of a new 350-bed hall serving first- and second-year students
• 200 beds will serve first-year students
• Double room configuration with sinks and community bathrooms that serve
8-12 students (rather than 20 plus students).
• Rooms will be arranged in podlike clusters (compared to long “double
loaded” corridors). Pods provide residents with more privacy and foster a
sense of community for the ten or so residents who live within the pod.
• 150 beds will serve second-year students
• Single room configuration with 4-8 students in a pod sharing a large
bathroom.
• Each pod will have access to a community space and kitchen with a stove
serving 8-16 students.
• The “community pod” concept will concretely reinforce the President’s vision
for bolstering the campus’ residential feel.
Phase 2: Scope & Design
The complex will also include in some form or fashion:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Conference and programming space
Food retail space
Outdoor seating that oversees the American River
Administrative offices
Recreation and community building space
Approximately 300 parking spaces for use by student
residents and staff working in the building, including
space allocated for bike racks and lockers
Phase 2: Project Goals
The programs and services in the new building stem
from a model that:
• Promotes academic achievement and student
success for both first- and second-year students.
• Promotes meaningful interactions among residents
throughout the building.
• Offers ‘theme floors’ with faculty mentors with the
intent of creating living-learning spaces.
• Provides adequate community space for educational
and recreational programming.
• Provides consolidated office space for Housing staff
and personnel.
• Provides a small retail dining space.
Union / WELL Expansion
Alternative Consultation Process for
Union WELL Inc.
• During Summer 2013, Union WELL Inc. hired an architect and a
financial consultant
• Staff and students toured “like” facilities on six other California
campuses to gather data for the Sac State project
• An in-depth study was conducted regarding the financial
feasibility of the project and its impact on the campus
• In early Fall 2013, staff from Union WELL Inc. held 28 open
forum and town hall meetings with student groups over a 4-week
period
• A final report was produced summarizing student feedback,
financial models, and questionnaire results
Alternative Consultation: The Data
A follow up questionnaire asked 18 questions
ranging from general demographic information to
very specific inquiries about meeting, lounge,
Health Center, and workout space preferences.
The results showed that it was important to
students to have:
• Additional food service seating (75%)
• Additional casual/study seating (77%)
• Additional meeting space (75%)
Alternative Consultation: The Data (cont.)
• Additional workout, weightlifting, and open
gym space (67%)
• Expanded health, counseling, and
psychological services (79%)
Responses also indicated that 44% of those who
completed questionnaires supported the fee to
build the event center and renovate the Union &
WELL. 55% did not support the fee.
Alternative Consultation: The Result
• The fee increase was approved by both the Union WELL
Inc. Board of Directors and the Student Fee Advisory
Committee
• After reviewing the data, President Gonzalez reluctantly
decided not to approve the fee increase
• Since student feedback showed a desire to expand both
the Union and The WELL, the President recommended
re-evaluating the scope of the expansion project, under a
much smaller fee, to include just the existing facilities
(University Union and The WELL), and not to include an
event center
Alternative Consultation: Next Steps
• Union WELL Inc. has hired a new architect and has
started the process of identifying priorities for
expanding the Union and The WELL
• A marketing committee is determining the most
effective approach to present the project to students
and receive feedback this spring
• Meetings with classes and student groups is
scheduled to take place during the month of March,
with a final report to be compiled and given to
President Gonzalez in April
Lassen Hall Updates
3rd floor renovations:
• We are in the process of renovating the Senior Vice
President’s office suite in order to provide more space for
the Student Conduct Office as well as a waiting area for
students visiting that office.
• We expect to complete the third floor renovations by July
2014. This may entail moving certain offices to a new
space as well as expanding the conference room.
1st/2nd floor plans:
• We expect to move some “back of the house” functions
from the first floor to the second floor to create space for
a student-services center (“One-Stop”) on the first floor.
• The anticipated timeline is late 2014/early 2015.
A Time of Change
Dr. Varlotta will be leaving Sacramento State
at the end of the Spring 2014 semester to
assume her new role as President of Hiram
College in Hiram, Ohio.
President Gonzalez is considering a couple of
scenarios to put in place for the short term.
More information is forthcoming.
Thank you very much.