University students grade their schools

Nevertheless, many universities—small and large—are seeing improvements on their NSSE results. Chris Conway, director of institutional research and planning at Queen’s, is cautiously optimistic about the trend. “There does appear to be some improvement province-wide [in Ontario] in student-faculty interaction and in active and collaborative learning,” says Conway. “They were particularly low [in 2006] and it appears they have increased somewhat.”

In Ontario, Nipissing, Trent, Western and Toronto have seen the largest increase in first-year responses for student-faculty interaction. On active and collaborative learning, the province’s universities as a whole saw a small improvement, and scores at Nipissing and Toronto were noticeably better. Outside Ontario, there have also been bright spots. The University of British Columbia saw its results improve on all five benchmarks. Initiatives that may have helped to raise UBC’s scores include improved study and social space for students; a peer support service and a campus hostel for commuters; more opportunities for paid and volunteer work; and more study abroad programs.

Other universities are taking similar steps. The University of Alberta, for example, wants all students to have the opportunity to take part in what it calls “common cohort” learning experiences, such as small labs and seminar sections, courses grouped together thematically, and first-year discussion groups. At McGill, measures to boost student engagement include increasing the availability and quality of academic advising, offering “learning to teach” workshops to graduate students, increasing opportunities for undergraduate students to participate in research projects, and expanding opportunities for students to study abroad.

And there’s more to come in the years ahead. The Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO) is funding research projects at 11 universities, testing various approaches for enhancing undergraduate engagement. Success will be measured by future NSSE scores. One institution (HEQCO will not name the universities participating in these studies) has significantly increased the amount of help available for first-year math students. Another school has created learning support groups for several types of at-risk students. Other projects included
interventions aimed at improving writing skills, programs to enhance science literacy in first year, and enhancements to student advising. Will these initiatives improve outcomes—grades, graduation rates, dropout rates, and so on? Will they raise NSSE scores? There are no instant answers. Many universities that took part in NSSE 2008 won’t be repeating the exercise until 2010.

Meanwhile, back at Calgary, Martin’s experience as a commuter will be particularly valuable to her as she goes through her interviews with the university community. Most Canadian university students live off-campus, and the realities of commuting make them a particularly difficult group to engage. That’s part of the reason why the top performers on the NSSE are not big, urban, research-intensive universities populated by commuter students, but small, undergraduate-focused, “destination” universities whose students live on campus. But if Calgary and other big schools are going to improve their benchmark scores, they have to, among other things, connect with commuters, duplicating Martin’s enthusiasm for her studies.

“There are so many things that interest me about the project,” says Martin. The most important, she says, is “the fact that the administration has chosen to move forward and do something about our NSSE results, and that they’ve chosen to hire students to be involved in the process.”

“As a commuter student it’s very easy to feel disconnected and isolated from the campus, but work like this is what makes me feel as if I am a member of some type of community at U of C.” It’s a sentiment that Calgary, like most Canadian universities, would like to see more of.