retention plan report - owens community college retention report owens community college page 1 of...

Noel-Levitz Retention Report

Owens Community College of 31

Retention Plan Report Owens Community College

July 2011 Toledo, Ohio

“Planning is the organization of hope.”

Steven Blum



Noel-Levitz July 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction and Executive Summary 3 Retention Goals 7 Institutional History 8 Mission Statement 8 Situation Analysis 9

Current State of Retention at Owens Community College 9 Student Satisfaction Data 13

Observations 15 Retention Strategy Statements 17 A Final Word 21 Appendices 22

Focus Group Verbatim Suggestions for Improvement 22




Retention Plan Owens Community College

Introduction and Executive Summary

This retention plan specifies goals, strategies, and responsibilities for improving the quality of student life and learning at Owens Community College (OCC). The planning process can be conceptualized by the following evidence driven improvement model that focuses on the “vital few improvements during each cycle in order to increase the probability of full deployment, recognizes the continuous nature of effective improvement approaches, and emphasizes consensus building through cross-functional participation during the plan development.”

PLAN (Decide) IUE Planning participants used data and experience to identify persistence performance gaps and agreed upon strategies to close those gaps.

DO (Execute) Champions for each strategy developed implementation action plans and are expected to support senior leaders and others whose engagement is necessary to implement the improvements.

STUDY (Evaluate) Measurement plans for each strategy will be developed to ensure availability of data to fully evaluate the effectiveness of each deployed strategy. The retention task force and senior leaders will perform a fact-based analysis.

ACT (Institutionalize) Following analysis of the measurement plan data and progress toward overall outcome goals, key participants and senior leaders will assess the impact of the strategy to determine if the return justifies the investment of resources.




This plan was developed with the direct involvement of the personnel listed below. Most participated in a one and one-half-day planning retreat on February 21-25, 2011 that was facilitated by Dave Trites, Noel-Levitz Senior Consultant. Others contributed to the development of strategy action plans or are serving on the retention plan implementation task force.

Toledo-Area Campus Meeting Attendance Dr. Renay Scott Exec Vice President/Provost Tamara Williams Interim Vice Provost Dr. Melissa Green Vice President – Findlay Campus Charlene Gilbert ACE Fellow - President's Office Anne Fulkerson Institutional Research Associate Dave Matheny Faculty – OFA President Jim Perry Faculty Jen Hazel Faculty Margaret Parker Faculty Betsy Johnson Dean, Student Accounts Wendy Howe Associate Director of Advising Raechel Matyas Advisor Alicia Lipinski Advisor Ron Buehrer Advisor Gary Walkowiak Advisor Lori Lamb Advisor Carolyn Ramsdell Advisor Cheryl Garlow Advisor Ken Clouse Advisor Susan Thomas Advisor Lois Stevens Advisor Judy Loehrke Success Mentor Jessica Priehs Success Mentor Gina Brundage Success Mentor Sheri Friesner Secretary, Student Development Yolanda Houle Data/Customer Service Specialist Elisa Rodriguez Administrative Coordinator - Student Development Christine Friess Student Worker Amy Giordano Director, Oserve Jodi Bixler Manager – Operations, Public Safety Randi Elliott Oserve Advocate Joyce Winters Asst. Director, Office of Student Success Jacquelyn Jones Program Manager - Bridge To Success Nancy Sheets Asst. Director - Career Services Verne Walker Director, Office of Student Success Mary Cole Asst. Director, Office of Student Success Lauren Ferguson Director, Faculty Development Center and FYE Karen Shultz Manager, Testing Services




Marshel Houston Manager, NSO Alexis DeAnda Resource Specialist - Project Degree Cory Stine Dean of Student Development Joe Carone Director of Admissions Jennifer Irelan Director of Admissions Events Jim Sickles Admissions Representative Melissa Bondy Admissions Representative Stanley Paige Admissions Representative Kari Morgan Admissions Representative

Source Meeting Attendance LaShawn Staples Administrative Asst. Richard Clark Oserve Advocate Steven Guerrero Advisor Willie Williams Director at the Source

Arrowhead Park Meeting Attendance Steven Hillard Director, WCS Sales Michael Bankey VP Workforce & Community Services Connie Buhr Director, WCS Operations Dave Siravo Director, WCS Skilled Trades & Apprenticeship Training Carl Dettmer Director, WCS Program Development

Findlay-Area Campus Meeting Attendance Carol Buser Interim Chair, School of Business - Findlay Marie Vasquez Brooks Chair, Allied Health - Findlay Tinola Mayfield-Guerrero Chair, Arts & Sciences - Findlay Gail McCain Library Manager - Findlay Betsy Johnson Dean, Student Accounts Tamara Williams Interim Vice Provost Dr. Melissa Green Vice President – Findlay Campus Charlene Gilbert ACE Fellow - President's Office Cory Stine Dean of Student Development Jeannette Passmore Success Mentor Steven Michaluk Career Services Specialist Kari Findlay Manager, Learning Support Services - Findlay Shannon Hadding Oserve Sr. Advocate - Findlay James Katzner Manager Student Activities & Conduct - Findlay Tammy Bauman Testing Center Specialist Jody Hertel Testing Center Specialist Stefanie Orians Admissions Representative

Patricia Petro Admin Asst. Sch. of Business, Criminal Justice, Allied Health

Sandy Taylor Oserve Advocate Jennifer Rodriguez Oserve Advocate Laurie Linville Oserve Advocate Jane Doty Admin Asst.




Irene Salazar Admin Asst. Tia Angelo Fitness Center Staff Lorena Baird Student Outreach Specialist Marian Moore Faculty Darla Johanssen Faculty Meghan Best Testing Services Susan Welling Faculty Amy Crofts Faculty Joan Berger Faculty Rose Warner Secretary Catherine Ford Chair, Medical Imaging Patrick Dymarkowski Advisor Robert Asel Advisor Richard Newcomer Advisor Terry Sherman Skilled Trades Coordinator Bobbi Morman Admin Asst. Katie Blacksidge Librarian Thomas Marshall Faculty Eileen Goodman Success Mentor Richard Bigras ABLE Manager Denise Shuster Chair, Social Behavioral Sciences Angela McGinnis Director of Advising Mike Senour Faculty - Club Advisor Rosemary Myers Advisor - Instructor Emilee Whetstone Advisor - Instructor Christie Tipton Transition Advisor Nadea Khorbotly Intern - VP Office Tracey Pritts Faculty Bob Connour Faculty Terri Brown-Joyce Advisor Ellen Sorg Faculty

The retention plan goals include a first-time, full-time associates degree-seeking freshmen entering the institution in the fall of 2011. It also targets late admitted and exploratory students. These goals and the strategies selected recognize the far-reaching impact focusing on first-year students will have on overall persistence, retention, and graduation rates.




Toledo-Area Campus Goal Statements The planning participants reached consensus on five populations they believed should be targeted for improvement. Following are draft goal statements for each of those populations which should be reviewed and modified as desired by the Noel-Levitz Core Team. These statements, when finalized, represent the critical goals that must be accomplished for the retention initiatives to be optimally successful. Complete documentation of the planning participants’ feedback during meetings is included in the appendix to this report. Retention is meant for fall 2011 to fall 2012 for new first time students. 1. City of Toledo Achieve a retention rate of 42% for new degree or certificate students from the city of Toledo who enroll during the fall of 2011. 2. Academic Preparedness/Readiness Achieve a retention rate of 37% of those students entering during the fall of 2011 who appear academically underprepared as determined by a high school GPA of 2.04 or less. 3. Age Achieve a retention rate of 38% for those students from 20-25 years of age entering during the fall of 2011. 4. Majors Achieve a retention rate of 45% for all majors containing over 200 students who enroll during fall 2011. 5. Ethnicity Achieve a retention rate of 35.5% for all students who report ethnic origin other than White. (Goals were derived from the 2011 Retention RT Model Data Tables provided by Noel-Levitz.)

Findlay-Area Campus Goal Statements The planning participants reached consensus on five populations they believed should be targeted for improvement. Following are draft goal statements for each of these populations. These statements should be reviewed and modified as desired by the Noel-Levitz Core Team and when finalized, represent the critical goals that must be accomplished for the retention initiatives to be optimally successful. Complete documentation of the planning participants’ feedback during meetings is included in the appendix to this report. 1. Academic Preparedness/Readiness Achieve a retention rate of 44.5% of those students entering during the fall of 2011 that appear academically underprepared as determined by a high school GPA of 2.22 or less.




2. Academic Major Achieve a retention rate of 56.5% for all majors containing over 50 students who enroll during fall 2011. 3. 19-25 years old Achieve a retention rate of 42% for those students entering during the fall of 2011 who are between the ages of 19 and 25. 4. Findlay & Fostoria Achieve a retention rate of 48.6% for students from Findlay and Fostoria High Schools who enroll during fall 2011. 5. Part-time Students Achieve a retention rate of 44% for part-time students (11 credits or less) who enroll during fall 2011.

(Goals were derived from the 2011 Retention RT Model Data Tables provided by Noel-Levitz.)

Institutional History Owens Community College began as a technical institute under the jurisdiction of the Ohio Department of Education. The first classes were offered in Toledo on September 13, 1965 with fewer than 200 students. Two years later in 1967, the College was chartered by the Ohio Board of Regents as a technical college. In 1983, Owens Community College opened its Findlay-area campus at Cory and Davis streets. In 1994, the College was chartered as a comprehensive state community college with a district encompassing Lucas, Wood, and Hancock counties, as well as parts of Ottawa and Sandusky counties. Since 1994, Owens Community College has more than doubled its student enrollment on the Toledo-area and Findlay-area campuses and is the fastest growing higher educational institution in Northwest Ohio. The College serves more than 45,000 credit and non-credit students annually.

Mission Statement Owens Community College is a regional community college in Northwest Ohio. The College has two campuses (the main Toledo-area campus and the Findlay-area campus 45 miles south of Toledo) and two learning centers (Arrowhead Park located in a business park in the suburb of Maumee and the Source located in the central city of Toledo). Students can pursue associate degrees and certificate programs as well as opportunities for life-long learning. Owens Community College focuses on student success by challenging students to grow intellectually and interpersonally in a supportive and scholarly environment. Owens Community College is committed to achieving the goal of full diversity among its students, faculty, and staff and to creating an environment which supports that diversity. Through its commitment to student success and the wise use of its human and other resources, Owens Community College promotes




the economic development and the educational and cultural well-being of the communities it serves.




Situation Analysis The Current State of Retention

“If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could then better judge what to do and how to do it.”

Abraham Lincoln The most common higher education benchmarks for retention rates, annual return rates, and cohort graduation rates are those defined and compiled by the American College Testing Program (ACT). Annual return rate is defined as the percentage of full-time, first-time freshmen enrolled at the institution the following fall. Owens Community College’s most recent retention rate of 48.3 percent for full-time first-time degree seeking students is approximately 5% below the ACT national average for similar public two-year colleges. Owens Community College’s most recent graduation rate of 9.5% for full-time, first-time degree seeking students lags approximately 16% behind the ACT national average for all public two-year institutions, but compares more favorably with the aspirant group. That group was made up of similarly sized urban community colleges. The ACT tables below illustrate average annual return rates and graduation rates for public institutions by admissions selectivity. ACT National First- to Second-year Retention Averages for Public Institutions Admissions Selectivity AA % BA % MA % PhD % Highly Selective 92 90 90.2 Selective 87 81.7 82.2 Traditional 55.2 71 70.1 73.2 Liberal 54.8 63.6 65.3 63.0 Open 53.7 59.1 63.5 74.4 First-time, full-time, degree-seeking (2009 ACT Data) ACT National Graduation Rate Averages for Public Institutions Admissions Selectivity AA % BA % MA % PhD % Highly Selective 71 73.5 78.9 Selective 68 51.8 53.7 Traditional 25.2 41.6 37.3 39.4 Liberal 37.8 33 31.3 42.0 Open 26 33.5 32.5 42.8 First-time, full-time, degree-seeking (2009 ACT Data)




The following table illustrates Owens Community College student retention rates compared to two local institutions and a composite for nine community colleges in the selected comparison group. OCC’s graduation rate compares most favorably with the selected group of large urban community colleges. All rates are those appearing on the College Online Opportunity Locator.

Graduation rates for full-time, first-time undergra duates who began in 2006

Owens Community College

Terra State Community College

Northwest State Community College

SSI Selected Group

Full-time Students 52% 55% 60% 57% Part-time Students 45% 57% 55% 42% Overall Graduation Rate 10% 19% 22% 8%

Data is from the National Center for Educational Statistics Website College Online Opportunity Locator (COOL). The following seven tables document Owens Community College persistence, retention and graduation rates over six years. All data for these tables was supplied by Institutional Research and is presented first as combined campus data and then broken out for each campus. Rates for full-time students are presented first, followed by rates for part-time students. The bold numbers in each full-time table are roughly comparable to the most recent ACT national average annual return rate of 53.7% and 26% graduation rate for two-year public college.

Owens Community College Full-Time Student Retention and Graduation Rate

Owens Community College Cohort Retention First-Time, Full-Time Degree-Seeking Students

First-time, full-time cohort

Number entering

Of the number entering, number returned spring term

Percent enrolled

(not necessarily full-time)

spring term

Of the number entering, number returned next fall

term

Percent enrolled

(not necessarily full-time) next fall

term

Of the number entering, number

graduated after three

years

Percent of the

number entering


years

Fall 2005 1,229 954 77.6% 635 51.7% 115 9.4% Fall 2006 1,182 918 77.7% 636 53.8% 123 10.4% Fall 2007 1,254 1,015 80.9% 667 53.2% 119 9.5% Fall 2008 1349 1,105 81.9% 732 54.3% 100 7.47% Fall 2009 1,839 1,491 81.1% 889 48.3% NA NA Fall 2010 2,028 1,523 75.1% NA NA NA NA

NA = Not Available




Findlay-Area Campus Full-Time Student Retention and Graduation Rate Owens Community College Cohort Retention

First-Time, Full-Time Degree-Seeking Students

First-time, full-

time cohort

Number entering


Percent enrolled


spring term


term

Percent enrolled


term



years

Percent of the

number entering


years

Fall 2005 237 186 78.5% 137 57.8% 16 6.8% Fall 2006 228 183 80.3% 116 50.9% 23 10.1% Fall 2007 254 202 79.5% 149 58.7% 29 11.4% Fall 2008 278 230 82.7% 150 54.0% 23 8.3% Fall 2009 408 339 83.1% 213 52.2% NA NA Fall 2010 440 315 71.6% NA NA NA NA

NA = Not Available

Findlay-Area Campus Part-Time Student Retention and Graduation Rate History

Owens Community College Cohort Retention Findlay First-Time, Part-Time Degree/Certificate Seeking Students

First-time, full-

time cohort

Number entering


Percent enrolled


spring term


term

Percent enrolled


term



years

Percent of the

number entering


years

Fall 2005 111 72 64.9% 54 48.6% 6 5.4% Fall 2006 75 48 64.0% 34 45.3% 4 5.3% Fall 2007 112 80 71.4% 60 53.6% 9 8.0% Fall 2008 131 80 61.1% 46 35.1% 3 2.3% Fall 2009 128 82 64.1% 50 39.1% NA NA Fall 2010 131 76 58.0% NA NA NA NA

NA = Not Available




Toledo-Area Campus Full-Time Student Retention and Graduation Rate History

Owens Community College Cohort Retention Toledo First-Time, Full-Time Degree/Certificate Seeking Students

First-time, full-

time cohort

Number entering


Percent enrolled


spring term


term

Percent enrolled


term



years

Percent of the

number entering


years

Fall 2005 992 768 77.4% 498 50.2% 99 10.0% Fall 2006 954 735 77.0% 520 54.5% 100 10.5% Fall 2007 1000 813 81.3% 518 51.8% 90 9.0% Fall 2008 1,071 875 81.7% 582 54.3% 77 7.2% Fall 2009 1,431 1,152 80.5% 676 47.2% NA NA Fall 2010 1,588 1,208 76.1% NA NA NA NA

NA = Not Available

Toledo-Area Campus Part-Time Student Retention and Graduation Rate History

Owens Community College Cohort Retention Toledo First-Time, Part-Time Degree/Certificate Seeking Students

First-time, full-

time cohort

Number entering


Percent enrolled


spring term


term

Percent enrolled


term



years

Percent of the

number entering


years

Fall 2005 446 251 56.3% 163 36.5% 13 2.9% Fall 2006 375 217 57.9% 148 39.5% 11 2.9% Fall 2007 549 331 60.3% 219 39.9% 11 2.0% Fall 2008 516 339 65.7% 189 36.6% NA NA Fall 2009 773 491 63.5% 252 32.6% NA NA Fall 2010 717 433 60.4% NA NA NA NA

NA = Not Available




Student Satisfaction Survey The Noel-Levitz consultant provided a brief analysis of student satisfaction data gathered prior to a campus visit through administration of the Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI). The SSI has a scale of 1 to 7, one is very dissatisfied and seven is very satisfied. The SSI was completed by 424 Findlay campus students and 2,138 Toledo campus students. A preliminary analysis of both the student satisfaction and institutional priorities survey results, prepared by OCC Institutional Research, is available on the Institutional Research intranet site. The SSI results suggest a level of satisfaction that is near the average for national two-year public colleges. Owens Community College demonstrated an improvement since the 2003 survey administration, and results are similar for each campus. In comparison to the Toledo Campus, the Findlay Campus had fewer items below national and comparison group averages. The following table illustrates the comparable results for three summary questions on the survey.

Student Satisfaction Summary Question Comparison Student Satisfaction Inventory Toledo Findlay Aspirant National

So far how has your experience met your expectations 4.69 4.66 4.83 4.79 Rate your overall satisfaction with your experience here thus far.

5.34 5.34 5.46 5.46

All in all, if you had to do it over, would you enroll here again?

5.64 5.63 5.82 5.72

Institutional Priorities Survey Toledo Findlay Aspirant National So far how has your experience met your expectations 4.61 4.64 NA 4.90 Rate your overall satisfaction with your experience here thus far.

5.47 5.54 NA 5.68

All in all, if you had to do it over, would you enroll here again?

5.80 5.67 NA 5.96

Each campus had many strengths and challenges. The following items represent the challenges that surfaced from the responses of Owens Community College students on each campus listed in order of importance. Students suggested that those items were more important, but less satisfying. For one of these challenges, (helpful financial aid counselors) OCC is still significantly above the national average for public two-year colleges (indicated by the + in the NAT column).




Findlay-Area Campus SSI Challenges

Item # Item OCC IMP

OCC SAT

OCC GAP

NAT SAT

8. Classes are scheduled at times that are convenient for me. 6.48 5.47 1.01 5.45

32. My academic advisor is knowledgeable about my program requirements.

6.38 5.51 0.87 5.37

15. I am able to register for classes I need with few conflicts. 6.37 5.50 0.87 5.41 39. The amount of student parking space on campus is adequate. 6.35 3.42*- 4.44 4.44

29. Faculty are fair and unbiased in their treatment of individual students.

6.28 5.39 0.89 5.38

46. Faculty provide timely feedback about student progress in a course.

6.23 5.15*- 1.08 5.30

65. Students are notified early in the term if they are doing poorly in a class.

6.20 4.59*- 1.67 4.91

24. Parking lots are well-lighted and secure. 6.15 5.15 1.53 5.11

37. Faculty take into consideration student differences as they teach a course.

6.14 5.14 1.00 5.23

20. Financial aid counselors are helpful. 6.13 5.25*+ 0.88 5.04 16. The college shows concern for students as individuals. 6.12 5.00 1.12 5.14

23. Faculty are understanding of students’ unique life circumstances.

6.12 5.22 0.90 5.24

* Statistically significant difference

Toledo-Area Campus SSI Challenges

Item # Item OCC IMP

OCC SAT

OCC GAP

NAT SAT

72. My advisor helps me to select classes that are appropriate to my academic goals.

6.37 5.32 1.05

31. The campus is safe and secure for all students. 6.35 5.27*- 1.08 5.55

32. My academic advisor is knowledgeable about my program requirements.

6.34 5.13*- 1.21 5.37

39. The amount of student parking space on campus is adequate. 6.32 3.62*- 2.70 4.44

46. Faculty provide timely feedback about student progress in a course.

6.27 5.20*- 1.07 5.30

52. The school does whatever it can to help me reach my educational goals.

6.27 5.15*- 1.12 5.25

24. Parking lots are well-lighted and secure. 6.26 5.01*- 1.25 5.11 5. The personnel involved in registration are helpful. 6.21 5.12*- 1.09 5.36

65. Students are notified early in the term if they are doing poorly in a class.

6.21 4.66*- 1.55 4.91

40. My academic advisor is knowledgeable about the transfer requirements of other schools.

6.20 4.86*- 1.34 5.12

20. Financial Aid counselors are helpful. 6.19 5.06 1.13 5.04

23. Faculty are understanding of students’ unique life circumstances.

6.17 5.08*- 1.09 5.24

25. My academic advisor is concerned about my success as an individual.

6.15 4.83*- 1.32 5.07

* Statistically significant difference above (+) or below (-) national average for two-year




Observations The observations below are among those from the Noel-Levitz consultant about student life and learning on the campuses of Owens Community College. Improved retention will be a powerful strategy for achieving future enrollment goals and the college can build from its success by developing a systematic, intentional, and organized way to manage the quality of student life and learning. There currently exists:

• An experienced group of senior leaders who value and understand the essentials of student success and advocate practices that encourage continuous improvement.

• A culture that appears to be shifting away from a recruiting focus defined as “get them

here” for census date enrollment toward one more in line with outcome measurements and learning readiness.

• A core of exemplary faculty and staff who appear ready to make improvements and who

demonstrate a commitment to increasing the quality of student life and learning experiences.

• At least 18 examples of excellent “tried and true” approaches to improving student

success including FYE 121, Success Mentors, Bridge to Success, Supplemental Instruction, Learning Communities, Project DEgree, Learning Support Services, and others.

• A lack of required student involvement in retention programs even though clear evidence

suggests that these programs increase student success. While numerous “best retention practices” are in place, OCC students are not required to participate.

• A current plan to improve staffing of academic advising coupled with a move toward

caseload advising seems well positioned to contribute to improved student success. The current approach to academic advising is random and unintentional; however, it has produced excellent advising interactions even though it has left major gaps in advising services.

• A developing enrollment management model that will contribute measureable results in

line with current priorities and the recent Ohio Board of Regents (OBR) performance funding approach.

• An advising model and approach that, in spite of the sincere efforts of many dedicated

advisors, is not meeting the needs or expectations of many OCC students. Scheduling of advisor interaction is generally left up to students, is not required, and appears to be primarily focused on academic scheduling resulting in a lack of systematic comprehensive developmental advising for OCC students who are not included in the special initiatives.




• Advising loads that appear large, but whose service population is inaccurate and vaguely defined.

• No use or uneven use of technology to support and encourage retention and advising.

• Limited faculty discussion and consensus-building for aspects of the college’s retention

programming.

• No defined pre-enrollment “early alert” program to target at-risk students during the first days/weeks of their first term. The post-enrollment early alert appears to work better on the Findlay-area campus due to the efforts of one key person, but improvements in the program could increase the ease of use and faculty participation there as well.

• An understanding and acceptance of the critical role accountability plays in all high

performing organizations along with institutional research capacity.

• No specific initiative that provides focused programming for sophomores designed to encourage successful transition toward graduation.

• A new student orientation that needs to be carefully aligned with Explore Owens and

extended orientation activities, such as FYE 121.

• Numerous student concerns about advising and access to classes. (While only a small number of students participated in the focus groups, advising and class access concerns also surfaced in the satisfaction surveys.)

• Advising concerns are especially acute among Toledo-area student responses; access to

classes is more prevalent among responses from students on the Findlay-area campus.




Toledo-Area Campus Retention Planning Outcomes Toledo-Area Campus Strategy Statements The planning participants reached consensus on six strategies they believed should be the “vital few” retention priorities. Each strategy statement provided below should be reviewed and edited by the assigned champions and their teams to ensure it captures the essence of the planning participants’ consensus discussions. (Notes taken by Chip Campbell documenting the process leading to these strategies appear in the appendix to this report.) 1. Early Notification Champions: Anne Fulkerson, Dave Matheny, Lorena Baird (Findlay) Team Members: Jeannette Passmore, Jen Hazel, Kari Findley, Lorena Baird, Mark Karamol, Verne Walker, Scott Coffman, Al Marchal, Jamal Salahat.

Implement two different early alert approaches. The first is based on pre-enrollment assessment to identify attributes and behaviors associated with at-risk students (i.e. SRP modeling) while they are still receptive to intervention. The second approach is based upon observed behaviors in the form of instructor feedback once students are enrolled. Advisors should have adequate knowledge of available college and community resources to ensure appropriate referrals can be made early in a new student’s first term.

2. Peer Educators Champion: Jen Hazel Team Members: Brittany Joseph, Betsy Johnson, Willie Williams, Jeannette Passmore, Verne Walker, Dave Matheny.

Expand the use of Peer Educators in the student life cycle.

3. Mandatory NSO & FYE with Visible Academic Plan Champion: Verne Walker Team Members: Joyce Winters, Mary Cole, Angie McGinnis, Marshel Houston, Jen Hazel, Lauren Ferguson, Willie Williams, Brittany Joseph, Adam Masters.

Require enrollment in a New Student Orientation and First Year Experience course for all new students during their first enrollment term. A review of the various FYE and NSO curricula could also ensure they address the unique needs of specific populations such as traditional-aged and returning students and are relevant to their program choices.

4. Comprehensive Review of Majors Champion: Denise Shuster Team Members: Cathy Ford, Beth Tronolone, Gretchen Carroll, Randy Wharton, Laurie Fathe, Amy Horst

Review all majors, especially “pre” majors to ensure they represent a viable education plan for students and improve services designed to increase retention within each major.




5. Referral/Information Sharing System Champion: Tamara Williams Team Members: Cory Stine, Betsy Johnson, Verne Walker, Chris Giordano, Nancy Sheets, Laurie Fathe, Chip Campbell

Create a referral-focused information-sharing system so that offices across campus (academic advising, supplemental instruction, peer mentoring, career services, Oserve, etc.) will have updated information on referral and community resources (i.e. mental health services, financial resources, housing, health care, employment agencies, protective and legal services, etc.).

6. Professional Development for Advisors, Faculty, and Staff Champions: Brian Paskvan and Professional Development Committee Team Members: Douglas Mead, Elizabeth Schroeder, Ruth Couch, Margaret Parker

Increase professional development for advisors, faculty, and staff, especially those who work with first year students, with a focus on increasing innovation and student engagement with the learning process. This would include training in Blackboard on reporting student progress and improving course delivery.

7. Required Advising Champions: Jen Hazel and Angie McGinnis Team Members: Pat Dymarkowski, Lori Owens, Sharon Badenhop.

Redesign the academic advising program to ensure a structured program that offers “front-end loading and progressive responsibility” to students in all majors. A reasonable first step should require all students to meet with their advisors prior to initial registration and then once a semester during their first year.

8. Comprehensive Career Services Champions: Nancy Sheets, Steve Michaluk, Jamey Katzner, Eileen Goodman.

Provide comprehensive career services for students who can benefit from internship and employment opportunities.




Toledo-Area Campus Planning Session Evaluation Those who participated in the March 15-16, 2011 retention planning session on the Toledo-area campus were asked to evaluate their experiences by offering observations about what went well (Plus) and suggestions for areas that could be changed or improved (Delta).

Plus + Delta ∆

Consensus process worked well—liked that consensus was defined for participants

More time for strategy development would have been useful

Very well organized with good support materials Stay on task at all times

The best practices were helpful More participation across the campus

Feels like we are making progress Would have liked to see and use the original data instead of the data prepared for the session

Happy for the inclusion which helped create positive feeling about the potential for improving student success

More external best practices could have informed the process

Open discussion was beneficial Packets and info in advance along with specific questions to prepare…knowing the workbook would be printed would have saved paper

Liked the ice breaker activities More student involvement

Ended on time...time managed well




Findlay-Area Campus Retention Planning Outcomes Findlay-Area Campus Strategy Statements The planning participants reached consensus on six strategies they believed should be the “vital few” retention priorities. Each strategy statement provided below should be reviewed and edited by the assigned champions and their teams in order to ensure it captures the essence of the planning participants’ consensus discussions. 1. Required Advising Champions: Jen Hazel and Angie McGinnis Team Members: Pat Dymarkowski, Lori Owens, Sharon Badenhop.

Redesign the academic advising program to ensure a structured program that offers “front-end loading and progressive responsibility” to students in all majors. A reasonable first step should require all students to meet with their advisors prior to initial registration and then once a semester during their first year.

2. Professional Development for Advisors, Faculty, and Staff Champion: Lauren Ferguson Team Members: Douglas Mead, Elizabeth Schroeder, Ruth Couch, Margaret Parker

Increase professional development for advisors, faculty, and staff, especially those who work with freshmen, with a focus on increasing innovation and student engagement with the learning process. This would include training in Blackboard on reporting student progress and improving course delivery.

3. Early Notification Champions: Anne Fulkerson, Dave Matheny, Lorena Baird (Findlay) Team Members: Jeannette Passmore, Jen Hazel, Kari Findley, Lorena Baird, Mark Karamol, Verne Walker, Scott Coffman, Al Marchal, Jamal Salahat.

Implement two different early alert approaches. The first is based on pre-enrollment assessment to identify attributes and behaviors associated with at-risk students (i.e. SRP modeling) while they are still receptive to intervention. The second approach is based upon observed behaviors in the form of instructor feedback once students are enrolled. Advisors should have adequate knowledge of available college and community resources to ensure appropriate referrals can be made early in a new student’s first term.

4. Comprehensive Career Services Champions: Nancy Sheets, Steve Michaluk, Jamey Katzner, Eileen Goodman.

Provide comprehensive career services for students who can benefit from internship and employment opportunities.




5. Cohort Programs Champions: Melissa Green and Verne Walker Team Members: Tinola Mayfield Guerrero, Marie Vasquez Brooks, Jeannette Passmore, Christie Tipton, Susan Burris.

Make cohort programming available to as many students as possible but especially to part-time students, and those out of high school from one to five years. This would be a virtual cohort.

6. Pre-Enrollment Assessment Champion: Karen Shultz ON HOLD

Create options for assessing learning readiness to improve student success in subsequent courses and degree matriculation. Given the current state of Testing Services in regards to the college and the other action plans, this item was put on hold as a result of discussions with the consultant. This will be reviewed in the future.

Findlay-Area Campus Planning Session Evaluation Those who participated in the March 17-18, 2011 retention planning session on the Findlay-area Campus were asked to evaluate their experiences by offering observations about what went well (Plus) and suggestions for areas that could be changed or improved (Delta).

Final Word This plan does not ensure results, but it documents disciplined appraisal, goal setting, and strategizing efforts that have identified priority improvement targets, strategies, and action plan. It describes what Owens Community College expects to achieve and how it will accomplish it. The continuing investment by the Owens Community College community is crucial for the success of this plan.

Plus + Delta ∆

Liked process More faculty, students and others participating

The facilitation was good Mix up participants to encourage more interaction

The data focus informed the process well Room format could have been improved

This provides clarity for what we have as priorities

Tell us in advance about the printed workbooks

Best practices were beneficial Invite student government

Charlene’s BP overview was useful

Good interaction among the groups




Appendices

Focus Group Verbatim Suggestions for Improvement – February 21-25, 2011

Headings designate who met for each discussion Student Focus Group – Toledo Campus

• Oserve – Lack of communication and organization since FA/Bursar/Records merger. • Lack of training? • Accuracy of information • Response time in person, phone, electronic • Parking • Told to park and ride from other side of campus but long wait for shuttle bus • Awareness of new slots at Heritage and Founders area. • Need incentives for car pooling • Green spaces for faculty/staff – students ticketed but faculty/staff not ticketed for parking

in regular spots. • No computer labs in Heritage Hall, only one small lab in Founders • Why did they remove computers in labs so there would be space for students with laptops

that could be used most anywhere on campus (if WiFi wasn’t running out of IP addresses)?

• Lack of computers, re-setting/re-loading without warning, sign off delay leading to security issues. Print Solution does not allow you to print double-sided.

• Owens website search engine very poor. • Veterans Services – paperwork not sent through in timely fashion – need more help. • Issues with Blackboard – broken links, knocked out of exams. • Safety & Security • Rude • Not enough outdoor lights • Positives are response time and visibility on campus making their rounds • Registered for classes then dropped in error. • Advising • Don’t know who my advisor is or where they are located. • Part-time advisors availability and student schedules • Different information from different advisors • My advisor talked down to me and I felt insulted (won’t see that advisor again). • Positive feedback on Success Mentors • Transfer – USelect is confusing, just classes, not majors and degrees • Advisors pushing/forcing classes for student to complete Associates degree when student

just wants to take classes and transfer. • Treat first year students better • FYE textbook – useless for non-traditional student. Class a waste if not taken in first

semester. Don’t like doing Scavenger Hunt every other week. Should be more




technology focused – Blackboard, Ozone, FA. Attending to the differences in level of student preparedness.

• Faculty should give feedback in a more timely fashion. 50% don’t use Blackboard. Specific feedback – what % of total grade does a specific grade represent?

• Club issue – limit of two tables in the Atrium so clubs cut out if external groups have reserved tables well in advance.

• Positive – One student indicated “Owens has changed my life.” Student Services - Toledo Campus

• What do you think you are doing well? • Emphasis on collaboration • More courage to take risks to do what is right for students • Building relationships • Evolving/changing to meet student needs • Transparency • Advisors believe they are doing the job they are supposed to be doing. • What is the goal/role of advising – Keep students happy? Keep enrollment up? Advisors

not given permission to do what is right for students. • McDonalds drive thru model – even though we have gone to appointments we still do

walk-ins • Difficulty in changing the overly simplistic “one-stop” perception. • Late arrivals should be prepared for next semester, not allowed to register

Academic Advisors - Toledo Campus

• Less advertising at last minute and after classes start. • Deadline on registration and FA (or other means of payment) • Problems of students in class but FA not approved and no books. • Last to come are first to go – lack of preparation ends up with holds, account forwarded

to Attorney General for non-payment. Result is student loss of confidence, self-esteem, and family support. Students need to understand what they are getting themselves into.

• Late students? • Second 8-week courses • Engagement and preparation for the next semester • Late registration creates conflict with faculty who believe advisors send students to get

faculty add approval (what students tell faculty) • Community issues and resources – money, transportation, childcare. “No Wrong Door”

training. The resource/referral hand off process needs to work. • Computer skills competency • Mandatory FYE • Mandatory NSO – but depends on curriculum. Problem of wide range of skills on

computer. • Required advising before subsequent semesters (15, 30, 45 hours) • Registration Rocks events – NSO should mirror some of this material. • Staff getting more advanced notice on changes/new things – like Acalog




• We do not have a comprehensive and consistent communication system for employees. Part-time staff often does not feel updated.

• Issue of student reading ability can are able to register for classes that they will need adequate reading ability to be able to succeed.

• Ability to Benefit but no HS diploma or GED allows them to take college classes (just required to have GED by AAS graduation).

• Can we set standards or as a community college are we stuck with Federal rules? • Transportation from student home to the loop, not just from the loop to Owens Toledo.

Can there be a parking/bus pass as part of the general fee? • “The Rush” at the start of Fall or Spring semester. • Caseload accuracy – weeding out FA terminated to get clear picture - current registered

and unregistered, Still active (within 2 years). • Oserve paper registration/add-drop – slow processing time means section availability has

often changed in meantime. • Wait list for filled sections. • More training for advisors on managing their Banner reports.

Admissions – Toledo Campus

• Better customer service – the personal approach, how do we translate “we care” into behaviors. Students come to Owens to be a person, not a number.

• Banner - helpful and designed more for registration and records than recruitment. • Noel-Levitz: • Populations – direct from high schools, high school rebound from 4 year institutions,

adult learners, and displaced workers. • High School populations - 30 counties, 5 staff, 225 schools • We need to use data better and do a better job of sharing information. • High schools are expecting us to provide the higher education/career services they no

longer provide. • Staff ambiguity about roles – in process of sorting out who will do what. • Difficulty in getting FA people to go out with us to do presentations. • Process of getting into college is more complicated as everything is being pushed to the

web. Believe we have resistance to take and key in paper applications. • We have a “herd” mentality – come in, stand in lines, sign up for classes, stand in lines at

the bookstore, etc. rather than an organized program for completion of all the steps. The “sexiness” of Registration Rocks versus come on in any time.

• Lost support for Registration Rocks via space, different ways to test students, different advising approach – now establish an advising relationship after orientation.

• Need to more with COMPASS in the high schools. • We have to quit changing jobs and philosophy and set our goal, set our process, and then

be consistent – we need stability and continuity. Front Line Staff - Toledo Campus

• Improve student experience and for you to do your job? • Technology, computers, phones, space, staffing for front desk




• Applications – recruiters, paper, web?? • New budget guidelines will reduce student worker hours • Communication – accurate information, awareness of what is being advertised • Defining the Owens Experience – helping students to know what to expect at what times,

what the process is, make it more systematic/organized. • People treating other employees poorly if they don’t get what they want. • Students not wanting to play the “adult role” (being accountable). • Mandatory NSO – make the session longer; differentiate from Explore Owens. • Marketing – “one stop” – people angry because it does not work that way. • No last minute registering for classes • Lack of civility – abusive/inappropriate behaviors • Matching hours of Student Development and Oserve – and Saturday hours? • Child care – cost, not available during breaks, no evening hours. • Enhanced website – more accurate and consistent, multimodal presentation of

information. • Noel-Levitz: dissatisfaction with advising is greater the farther along the student is in

their coursework and greater with younger students than non-traditional students. Faculty - Toledo Campus

• Need for advisors to be located in the academic departments • Understand program needs • Overrides, pre and co-requisites • Advisors at grass roots building relationships • History of evaluations at OCC as being punitive. Same form was used back in 1990’s. • Scheduled evaluation/class visit does not give an accurate picture. • Student feedback via evaluations - Optional, students not invested. • One size does not fit all – revamp and customize by academic area. • Classrooms design lacks functionality for different department/subject area. • Difficulties for Chairs in evaluating adjuncts – mostly just the adjuncts about who they

receive complaints. • Faculty/Professional Development • Fall semester opening week – no longer mandatory • Other activities at faculty member discretion • Only incentive is for rank change • We don’t track professional development • AQIP Peer Reviewers have required training - paid for by College • Before faculty go to a training the College pays for: • What is the value added? • Will they bring back information and trains others




Student Focus Group – Findlay Campus Biggest Complaints:

• Parking – T and TH are worst - especially when there are other activities on campus, need for early arrival to get spot, grassy areas between the back lot and building that have no sidewalks. Why does parking fee have to be put on student account – why can’t I just go in and pay for it when I get it (VA won’t pay for it and argues with student about why they put it on their student account.

• Scheduling – why not W & F classes, the whole “what days classes are available” issue; college preferences seem to create the problem.

• Advertising is disingenuous - Students feeling misled because they are told prior to beginning that they can complete a program at Findlay and later are told they will have to go to Toledo to complete.

• Advising & Transfer – Vet rep only here one day a week, difficulty contacting by phone, scheduled 3-4 weeks out. Conflicting info/recommendations from advising/mentors; Transfer advisors recommendations then different info from 4 yr. institution advisor; ART classes not transferring; the “ease of transferring is not easy. Associate degree not a stepping stone to BA/BS. 4 yr. institutions say you don’t need, just get the classes that will transfer and then move to 4 yr. Students need to keep syllabi and texts to shoe 4 yr. institutions. Need for transfer orientations.

• Classroom disruptions – loud, juvenile, meanness/abusive, profanity, lack of civility; people lack of awareness of the people around them. Issue of classroom expectations being written in syllabus and talked about by the instructor, people following up by reporting if an incident of inappropriate behavior occurs.

Student Services - Findlay Campus Noel-Levitz: In your experience which of the programs/services on the white board have the most potential to have the greatest impact on student success and the Success Points? Programs/Services with three or more votes:

• FYE – Title III • Success Mentors - Title III and OCC • Bridge to Success - Title III • New Student Orientation – OCC • Caseload Advising - OCC • Learning Support Services – OCC • Noel-Levitz: A previous participant stated the biggest challenge is consolidating

programs. “Wonderful people can make a difference but a system needs to be in place so that difference can happen again and again.”

• All are students are at risk and need to make those connections to resources. We need to train ourselves in how to make and keep these connections.

• Need required NSO (initial and extended) and FYE tailored to specific populations. Financial Literacy in NSO or its own program.




• Student lack of preparation – registering late, no FAFSA filed or just filed (therefore no book voucher).

• “How much are students overwhelmed/inexperienced re: Ozone and how much are simply students using it as an excuse?”

• Top 5 student questions asked should result in “cheat sheets” for all staff. • Noel-Levitz: “The problem is almost always in the process rather than the people

(inputs).” Advisors and Admissions – Findlay Campus

• Dev Ed – different models/course lengths – failures are using up all their FA. • There is less focus on Dev Ed now that it is not its own department. • Set a registration deadline re: last minute students (burning more FA to fill in 12 hours

with HPE classes, etc.) • Problem of ENG capped at 15 so no room for later registrants but then only 10 or less

show up when classes begin. • Need first day attendance policy and students should not be allowed to register until FA

is approved so classes that are filled don’t end up only half to two thirds full when students are dropped for non-payment.

• “We have to quit apologizing for making students do things that will help them to succeed.”

• We don’t have an Early Alert system (other than email referral to Student Outreach (Lorena) or Success Mentor.

• We need to have an “Administrative Withdrawal” that faculty can use for students who never show up.

• All instructors should have to use Blackboard (including all grades and absences); have assigned advisor for each student on Blackboard class lists.

• Guest students – turning away an honor student from Ohio Northern requesting PSY 260 because they have not taken PSY 101 (our prerequisite).

• OBR says we have to treat native and transient students the same but then we let students in after semester begins for head count.

• Communication/awareness on Findlay campus is much better. • Advisors need more time in student sessions and smaller caseloads (currently 500-700

enrolled students) so there can be relationship building; particularly Success Mentor with at-risk, FYE, student and instructor referrals.

• Advising needs an electronic academic plan software; electronic Advising Syllabus for student to complete the tasks in Ozone.

• Student basic computer skills – Bridge format for most all Owens students, Quick Start format for late students.

• Problem of no counseling/mental health services • Bridge and Project Degree students get their hands held and then still expect it when they

move into regular classes. • Admissions clarification – if they fill out a card they are a “recruit” and if they fill out an

app they are an “applicant.”




Front Line Staff – Findlay Campus • Mandatory NSO and special for TRA/WIA students, different for transfer student – “not

how to do well but where things are.” • Noel-Levitz: Have we ever thought of orientation for sophomore students? • An FYE or Orientation for FA – all sorts of difficulties arising from not understanding

their FA, should it be prior to registration? • Huge mistake of students coming in at the last minute with FA nor filed or approved. • Noel-Levitz: “The last to come are the first to go.” • Last minute arrivals – classes that start later, wait and prepare for next semester. • Require IST 100 for computer literacy. • Student lack of computer resources and OCC computer lab access. • Students lack of understanding of Ozone and all that they can do with it. • Advertising is disingenuous - Students feeling misled because they are told prior to

beginning that they can complete a program at Findlay and later are told they will have to go to Toledo to complete.

• Schedule for 201130 and 201160 becoming available later due to block scheduling set up. • Need for systematic information sharing, accuracy of our information to students. • Oserve answering calls for both campuses so need to have accurate info on both

campuses. • Advertising/informing re: certificate programs not covered by FA. • Communication Plan for students – do we overload them with letters and other mail? • Instructors informing students when not doing well – could Oserve be notified so they

can assist student with FA issues. • Student difficulty getting instructors to response to phone or email messages (both online

and land based classes).

Open Focus Group – Findlay Campus (All special programs/services aimed toward student success and funding source were listed on the white board.)

• Quick Start – grant • FYE – Title III • Supplemental Instruction - Title III • Success Mentors - Title III and OCC • Transition Advising – OCC • Athletic Advising – OCC • Bridge to Success - Title III • Project Degree – Gateway • New Student Orientation – OCC • Success Scholarship Program – OCC Foundation • Caseload Advising - OCC • Learning Support Services – OCC • Early Alert – OCC • Student Success Classes (SSC) – OCC




• Oserve – OCC • Probation/Dismissal/Readmission – OCC • ABLE – OCC and State of Ohio

Noel-Levitz: Students at Findlay quite positive on SSI; fewer complaints that the national average. Chief Complaints:

• Lack of access to convenient classes • Advising and registration • Staff did not overestimate how they were doing compared to student perception. • Need to facilitate classes at different sites (transportation between sites) • Better support services for Veterans • Dev Ed course placement – Students not able to succeed and should go to ABLE but

able to choose whether to remain in ABLE or go on they choose college classes for FA.

• Allow online students to bridge into land classes via the web. • Promote Career Advising more strongly. • If sections are full create other options that just push to online or Toledo (open more

sections). • How do we factor in student needs into constructing the schedule? • Classroom with larger capacity and team teaching as response to more sections. • Student basic computer literacy (IST 100) • Being adamant about what they need - “We have to quit apologizing for making

students do things that will help them to succeed.” • Continue to work on how to make campus more welcoming. • Don’t place in classes unless they meet Ability to Benefit – would involve a change

with the cut scores.

Activities & Sports – Findlay Campus • Cross Country/Track Club – striving to elevate to intercollegiate sport (they currently

participate in meets). • 3 on 3 basketball tournaments. • Real limits re: facilities. (New community facility 6 miles away). • General imbalance in comparison to Toledo. • Number of clubs has doubled (previous only 15 hour staff person, now full-time

activities/conduct staff member). • Only one full-time faculty involved with a club – all others are adjuncts. Difficulties for

students connecting with adjuncts. • More faculty involvement and encouraging students to attend cultural diversity events;

more support from OFA. • Athletics creating a sense of belonging – Findlay students going to Toledo to participate

in sports. • Started Social Work, Criminal Justice, and Honors clubs. • Trying to create/build a stronger Toledo-Findlay connection.




• Owens Link technology often does not work.

Faculty – Findlay Campus • 8 am classes for students with children – does not work. • Running out of seats in land based classes (especially summer) – pushes some students to

web based who shouldn’t be. • More one day a week classes – particularly Friday • Classes that are only offered in the daytime when students are requesting evening section

as well. Student needs not considered enough – older students more dissatisfied. • Mandated by OBR to have classes on the books so program can be completed in 2 years

even though the vast majority take longer than 2 years. • Findlay not feeling connected – everything is geared to Toledo. • Students feeling misled because they are told prior to beginning that they can complete a

program at Findlay and later are told they will have to go to Toledo to complete. Toledo is very large to those students from small county high schools who find Findlay to be large.

• How much is the Retention Referral Form being utilized? A range of “red flags” – attendance, transportation, child care, etc. Adjunct faculty awareness of referral forms?

• Findlay attempting to do mentoring of adjuncts. • Students need to get notification if they are doing poorly in the early part of the semester

(5 weeks). Student athletes do via academic progress report. • IST – students need more than degree but need certifications which we no longer do at

Findlay (why isn’t this built into our program). Students (and instructor) go to Terra to take certification tests.

• Advising Process - Better now that advisors are assigned to schools. Should be required in first semester.

• Problems • Where it can still be just registration (fill in their schedule for 12 hours), doing overrides

allowing students to be in classes (ENG) where they haven’t completed Dev Ed prerequisite (reportedly 900 students).

• Rapid Registration (one stop) • No writing sample in Compass • Food service needs to open longer hours as does the Bookstore, computer labs, Library. • Brown bag lunch/hot dogs and chips – more gathering activities for students in the

Atrium.

Source Learning Center • Excellent communication between Advising, Oserve, front desk, Director. • Students coming in after the first class meeting. • Student circumventing advising by going to faculty to sign them in late. • Trying to say “No” to students when the previous standard was to say “Yes” to

everything. • Bad decisions by students driven by desire to get maximum FA and “I don’t want getting

my degree to take too long.”




• Students not taking advantage of resources available (tutoring). • Student’s difficulty in differentiating what I want versus what I need. • How to bring tutoring in as an integrated activity through FYE 121. • Advising caseloads 500-800 students and contacting students inactive but previously

enrolled in last 12-18 months. Problem that EZAMAST does not include if student is FA terminated.

• How to make sure student contact with advising is not just random – getting away from “the right to fail.”

• Push the message “if you fail to plan then you are planning to fail.” If you don’t do XYZ then you won’t succeed.

• Push the message – “what I am spending and saving by going to Owens.” • We should:

o Build relationships better o Give them resources o Require NSO and have Source NSO be like Bridge orientation

• Transportation from the loop to the Source. • Developing seamless process to Explore Owens into NSO. • Perceived conflict – recruiters having students fill out and sign cards or complete

application and students coming in and either complete application then Explore Owens or do Explore Owens then complete application.

Arrowhead Learning Center • Not everybody understands the various services Owens offers. Need pocket guide of the

OCC services. • Noel-Levitz works with “Predictive Modeling” – predicting what the student needs really

are. • Single entrance a tremendous asset – positive staff contact with clear answers/directions. • No ombudsperson – students not knowing where to go for help with difficult situations. • At Toledo – students being transferred from office to office rather than being directed to

the right person with the first transfer. • FA monies being eaten up by taking and re-taking Dev Ed courses when they need to first

utilize ABLE (no cost). Also, Compass Extended Prep classes available but students in a hurry to take Compass and start classes even if not ready.

• Open enrollment has been thought in the past to mean say yes to everything (right to fail) rather than requirements that promote student success.

• Allowing students in at last minute and then they are later dropped because FA did not come through.

• Students declaring a major (like Nursing) but only completes STNA or Transportation Tech but only takes 2 truck driving classes – way to be dishonest to get FA monies.

• Staff who do not believe students are our customers. Need for training on our own internal marketing/internal customers.

• Problems with communication between departments.




• Description of school where student is required to interview with a faculty member in their choice of major to make it seem it was a selective process even though it was open enrollment.

Exit Briefing – Findlay Campus Noel-Levitz:

• “You are in position to be the institution you want to be.” • “You may need to delay access for some students but that is OK because it is done to

increase the possibility for success.” • “Work with Success Data to determine what the return on investment is for the

various retention focused programs.” • “Identify populations most able to benefit – these are your vital priorities.” • “Owens is already involved in doing all the things to improve retention.”

Opportunities

• Transportation with Toledo and the Source; transporting cohorts. • Advising, Advising, Advising

o Needs to be mandatory and intrusive o Will work if useful and accessible o Too many fall through the cracks

• Work Study Discussion

• Faculty Development Center – best place to change faculty attitudes re: retention. • “We will not lower our standards.” • We do not have a specific “recruit back” strategy. • Technology • Beyond Banner • Early Alert/student awareness • NSO and FYE • Specific for certain populations, adjust curriculum for each, require for all. • Ramp up technology readiness and financial literacy. • Accuracy and integrity of communication – verbal, Acalog, marketing. • Re-think the class schedule in terms of student needs. • Be clear on the thin line between Explore Owens and NSO. • Pre-enrollment Early Alert – predictive modeling. • Policy Reviews • Account holds • Graduation eligibility – pointing out to students • Administrative withdrawals • Application and Registration Deadlines – do what’s best for the student because

last to come is first to go; has to go hand in hand with marketing.




Project Status • From which activities are we getting the most return and minimum push back? • Advising • Scheduling • Comprehensive Retention Plan • 30 people from each campus to really understand that data and our plan • After next campus visit • Use Data Tables to identify target populations that will be most helped by

intervention/program • Bring group to consensus on 3-5 goals with strategies. • NL Core Team monitors progress of each group (led by a champion)

Retention Strategy Action Plans Developing good activity/action plans is the most important, detailed, and time-consuming part of the quality enhancement (retention) planning process. The activity/action plans that follow are the “heart” of this plan.

retention plan report - owens community college retention report owens community college page 1 of...

Documents