Gordon State College 2023
Gordon State College’s mission is to be a catalyst for exceptional and accessible education through innovative teaching, engaged learning, and transformative experiences for the benefit of our students, the communities we serve, and the world we live in. As an access institution, we provide engaged faculty-student interaction through intimate classroom experiences; innovative and effective teaching strategies; excellent advising and mentorship programs; and effective student support services. GSC offers baccalaureate and associate degree programs. The institution has focused more in recent years on meeting the needs of underrepresented populations and dual-enrollment students.
Final Fall 2023 enrollment was 3,145. We saw a consistent make-up of our Fall 2023 first-time, full-time freshman cohort with that of the Fall 2022 cohort:
- 44.1% had learning support requirements, up from 42.6% in Fall 2022.
- 22.9% of entering FTFT freshmen had only a Math requirement (N=166), up from 21.2% in Fall 2022 but down significantly from 55.1% in Fall 2021.
- 20.9% had both Math and English requirements (N=151), fairly consistent with Fall 2022’s 20.6%.
- Less than 1% had only an English requirement (N=3), about the same as Fall’s 2022 1%.
- 51.93% were African-American, up from 51.2% in Fall 2022.
- Less than 1% self-identified as first-generation college students, consistent with Fall 2022’s 1%; however, another 99.3% chose not to answer the question, and we suspect our first-generation population is actually much larger.
Data points for Fall 2023:
- Adult Learners – 20.6%
- First-generation – 3.14% Y, 11.1% N, 85.7% Unknown
- Pell Grant Eligible – 45% All undergraduate students, 60% FTFT students only
To better serve our student population, Gordon State College was one of the first institutions in the USG to take remediation transformation to scale, and we continue to see improved success rates in gateway courses like ENGL 1101 and MATH 1111. Also, we have targeted traditionally underserved populations such as African-American males for increases in access and completion. At the same time, our institution continues to see high numbers of dual-enrollment students each year (309 new dual-enrollment students in Fall 2023).
Institutions that are similar to our college such as South Georgia State College and East Georgia State College. The institutional profiles are similar in that each institution in the state college sector has on-campus housing and similar student demographic in terms of gender, race and learning support status. Here are the retention datapoints for comparison:
Retention:
|
|
2019
|
2020
|
2021
|
2022
|
|
South Georgia State College
|
46.2%
|
50.0%
|
50.4 %
|
53.3%
|
|
East Georgia State College
|
53.3%,
|
48.6%,
|
49.8%,
|
48.4%
|
|
Gordon State College
|
55.9%,
|
58.7%
|
48.8%
|
49.8%
|
Gordon State College experienced a significant drop in our retention rates immediately after the pandemic. We have seen a slight increase in our retention rates this year as we are up 1.1%.We are making efforts to increase our retention rates by utilizing the following high impact practices:
- Early Alerts
- Faculty Mentoring*
- Professional Advising*
- Tutoring
- Block Scheduling
- Program Maps *
- First-Year Seminar (FIRE 1000)*
- Enhanced New Student Orientation*
- African-American Male Initiative
- Purposeful Enrollment Strategies
*Section 2 will have updates
Associate Degree 3-Year Graduation Rates
|
Cohort
|
Gordon State College
|
East Georgia State College
|
South Georgia State College
|
|
2017
|
11.8%
|
13.3%
|
19.1%
|
|
2018
|
14.2%
|
16.4%
|
15.4%
|
|
2019
|
13.6%
|
13.0%
|
20.0%
|
As indicated by the data for retention and graduation above, we know that we have improvements to make if we would like to exceed the datapoint of our sister institution, South Georgia College. We have set a 60% retention goal and 20% graduation goal that can be reached within the next 2 years. We believe that we can reach that goal by sticking to the plans that were outlined in our Student Success Redesign Plan in 2022 which was developed as a result of the USG Study Group Report.
Success Inventory
Strategy/Project Description:
The Faculty Mentor Program at Gordon State College pairs first-year students (students under 30 credit hours) with faculty in the student’s major area/area of focus. Faculty mentors act as part of the student’s success team. They provide professional and career guidance, encouragement, and help connect students with campus resources. All tenure-track faculty members serve as faculty members. Faculty mentors act to provide services and support that complement the services offered by GSC’s professional academic advisors.
Evaluation/Assessment plan:
Evaluation Plan and measures: KPIs: 1. The “mentoring” service listed in Navigate appointment summaries. 2. Student survey question asking students to identify their mentor
Baseline measure (for each KPI): 1. One “mentoring” service per mentee, 2. One mentor identified by each student (every student can identify their mentor)
Current/most recent data (for each KPI):Data Incomplete. KPI 1 was just implemented and KPI 2 will be implemented at the end of Fall 2023. Program is only in its third semester.
Goal or targets (for each KPI): 1. One-half “mentoring” services listed for the total amount of mentees. 2. One-half of the total mentees being able to identify their mentor.
Progress and Adjustments:
Spring 2023 was the first full semester of the Mentor Program at Gordon State College. New GSC students under 30 credit hours were assigned mentors within the first month of the semester. This addition slightly increased the average of 13 students per mentor achieved in Fall 2022. On the mentor side, mentors continued to follow the touchpoint timeline distributed in Fall 2022. Mentors were encouraged to contact and meet with their mentees at critical times in the semester. During this term, GSC saw increased faculty involvement and interest in the program. For example, a college-wide faculty committee (AARFA) met several times to discuss changes to the mentor program and to investigate ways to increase mentor-mentee interaction.
The most significant recommendation that the committee made was to reform the way that mentees are assigned to mentors. Going forward, more faculty stakeholders will be involved in the assignment process. In addition, different departments and schools could design their own ways of assigning students to mentees. For example, the Education faculty at Gordon took a more hands-on approach and divided up mentees among themselves based on whom the faculty had a pre-existing familiarity.
The new approach to assigning mentees was implemented in Fall 2023. However, due to data-related problems, mentees were not assigned to faculty until the third week of the term. This ran contrary to our goal of assigning mentees during the first week of the term (or even before). We were, however, able to have our IT Department create an Argos report so that we can get the list of new students under 30 credit hours much earlier in future semesters. For Spring 2024, we should be able to begin assigning mentees during the first or second week of classes.
One significant adjustment we made during 2023 was the process in which mentees are removed from mentors. The program's purpose is to provide new GSC students with a faculty mentor during their first year when they receive professional advising. Most students, though, are assigned a faculty advisor after they move beyond 30 credit hours. That faculty advisor can then also serve as a mentor for the student. Ideally, a student’s faculty mentor should become their advisor when they move beyond 30 credits. However, due to program changes, faculty shortages in certain areas, and other problems, this does not always happen. As a result, we have established a process for removing mentees from mentors who have moved beyond 30 credit hours and have a different faculty advisor. This is a process we will need to continue to refine and improve.
The final significant change we made was to the way we gather data. Based on our conversations with our EAB Navigate representative, we concluded that the best way to gather data about mentor-mentee interactions was through the appointment summary in Navigate. We then created a “mentoring” service in Navigate and asked faculty to select that service when they completed appointment summaries after meetings with mentors. That way, we could quantify (at least in terms of a base) how many interactions mentors and mentees had. This new approach to gathering data has been problematic due to faculty adoption; many faculty are not completing appointment summaries or selecting the mentoring service after meeting with students. Going forward, we need to better educate faculty on how to use Navigate to document their interactions with mentees.
Plan for the Year Ahead:
The most significant step we must take in the year ahead is increasing engagement between mentors and mentees. Above all, this requires substantial communication at all levels. We plan to use global emails and other messaging to explain the program to students. We will also spend more time discussing the program during new student orientations. One thing that could aid this is to assign faculty mentors to mentees before the start of the semester. In addition to communication, we need to increase faculty buy-in by discussing the program and changing the program based on faculty feedback and suggestions.
The second significant step we need to take in the year ahead is in the way we gather quality data. We need to do a better job of getting faculty to complete appointment summaries using the “mentoring” service. In addition, we need to craft surveys that we can send to faculty and students. For example, student surveys could ask how often a mentee met with a mentor and if the mentee found their interactions helpful.
Challenges and Support:
The most significant challenge for the program is related to how useful and effective the program is perceived to be by students. The success of the program requires mutual interest and involvement. We believe that the solution to this challenge lies in data and communication. If we can collect data demonstrating that the program is effective, we can communicate that data to faculty and students and hopefully convince them of the usefulness of mentee-mentor interactions and engagement. As a result, we believe it will take time and effort to brand the program so that both groups see it as something extraordinarily valuable for them to participate in.
Supports Needed: Ideas about collecting data related to the performance of the program. In addition, if there are other platforms/systems (other than EAB Navigate) that other institutions use, that would be helpful to know.
Primary Contact:
Dr. Scott Shubitz, Interim Department Head, Mathematics & Applied Sciences
Strategy/Project Description:
FIRE 1000 (Freshmen Introduction to Reasoning Essentials) is a first-year course intended to stimulate students’ academic self-efficacy, depth of intellectual inquiry, and problem-solving skills. This is done through research and reflection to achieve a deeper understanding of themselves, their purpose, and the campus community. FIRE 1000 was launched in 2017 and is required at GSC for all new students and transfer students under 13 credit hours.
Evaluation/Assessment plan:
Evaluation Plan and measures: KPIs: Students completing the USG Mindset Survey
Baseline measure (for each KPI): 50% of students enrolled in FIRE 1000 every semester
Current/most recent data (for each KPI):not available yet
Goal or targets (for each KPI): 65%
Time period/duration: 1 year
Progress and Adjustments:
The course underwent a partial redesign in the Fall of 2021. The course was broken into three units: 1. Mindset and student success, 2. Self-knowledge and academic planning, and 3. Critical thinking in a focus area. Over the last year, we have been making observations and gathering data related to the efficacy of the redesign.
We have integrated NACE soft skills into the course.
We have integrated Stepping Blocks into the course.
We administer the USG Mindset Survey to all students in the class.
One instructor has begun to experiment with student accountability teams. In this, the instructor creates teams of students at the start of the semester. Team members are tasked with encouraging others to attend class and succeed. There is also some group work involved.
Two of our FIRE instructors (Steve Raynie and Valerie Calhoun) are working on an open-source textbook for the course. Six chapters have been drafted so far.
Plan for the Year Ahead:
We are considering renaming the course. We believe “freshman” has a limiting connotation for the course, and “introduction” makes it seem like it is a simple or non-involved course.
We will focus on rebranding the course to students, so they perceive it as valuable and fundamental to their studies and future professional life.
We are starting to discuss switching back to our old course model, where instructors act as advisors for the students. From our experience and based on student feedback, students’ sense of belonging increases when their FIRE instructor is also their advisor.
Challenges and Support:
Challenges: To adopt our old model, where FIRE instructors also serve as student advisors, we will need to hire more lecturers/advisors. However, our professional advisors are not qualified to teach FIRE 1000. This change may not be possible in the immediate future, as it requires funding that GSC does not have.
Support Needed: Funding or a grant to hire lecturers/advisors to teach FIRE 1000 and serve as advisors for first-year students.
Primary Contact:
Scott M. Shubitz, Interim Department Head, Mathematics & Applied Sciences
Momentum Area:
Purpose
Change Management
Data & Communications
Strategy/Project Description:
New Student Orientation (NSO) is designed to help students settle into campus life and fully prepare for the start of their classes and college journey. Students will learn more about campus resources, bond with classmates at social events, and familiarize themselves with campus before classes begin. As part of the Student Success Redesign at Gordon State College, via the USG Study Group, we determined that we needed to revamp our pre-orientation platform to allow for NSO registration and the deployment of a scheduling survey for students. We also determined the following next steps for New Student Orientation:
- Redesign pre-orientation and post-orientation survey
- Determine the assignment of NSO responsibilities to a position
- Determine the data management system to use to deliver pre-orientation and post-orientation survey.
Evaluation/Assessment plan:
Evaluation Plan and measures: We are in the process of developing an evaluation plan and measures to capture the responses from our pre-orientation platform as well as working with campus partners to develop metrics to track if orientation dates, types and length impact student success.
When we created the Student Success Redesign, we developed the following goals and KPIs
Evaluation Plan and measures:
|
New Student Orientation
|
At least 85% of all new students who attend NSO will complete all NSO goals
Comparison of GPA, retention by NSO attendance date and NSO type
|
We have since hired a new president, Dean of Students, Dean of Enrollment Services and Provost. The Dean of Students and Director of Student Life will work with the Director of Student Success, Advising and Testing to develop and reestablish goals.
Primary Contact:
Dr. Brie McDaniel, Director of Student Life and Recreation
Strategy/Project Name:
Program Maps and Pressure Testing
Momentum Area:
Pathways
Change Management
Strategy/Project Description:
Retention and graduation rates have increased nationally due to the implementation and design of well-crafted program maps with an emphasis on students taking fuller schedules categorized by the 15-to-finish initiative. Gordon State College made early efforts to create program maps with co-curricular milestones using the theme of Gordon’s Highlander EDGE. After careful review we noticed that some of the program maps had not been pressure tested and we have now determined a plan to carefully review, and pressure test our program maps annually.
Evaluation/Assessment plan:
Evaluation Plan and measures:
KPIs:
- Change in three-year graduation rate for associate degree students
- Change in six-year graduation rate for bachelor’s degree students
- Number of hours per associate degree graduate
- Number of hours per bachelor’s degree graduate
Baseline measure (for each KPI):
- Change in three-year graduation rate for associate degree students
- Change in six-year graduation rate for bachelor’s degree students
- Number of hours per associate degree graduate
- Number of hours per bachelor’s degree graduate
|
Associate Graduation Cohort
|
Gordon State College
|
|
2017
|
11.8%
|
|
2018
|
14.2%
|
|
2019
|
13.6%
|
|
Bachelor Graduation Cohort
|
Gordon State College
|
|
2015
|
12.3%
|
|
2016
|
17.0%
|
|
2017
|
15.1%
|
Goal or targets (for each KPI):
- Change in three-year graduation rate for associate degree students
- Change in six-year graduation rate for bachelor’s degree students
- Number of hours per associate degree graduate
- Number of hours per bachelor’s degree graduate
Progress and Adjustments:
- Implementation of the new IMPACTS core is underway.
- The history Area F is in the process of being changed to eliminate the foreign language requirement.
- Changing prerequisite/corequisite for ENGR 1100 and 1111 to MATH 1111 from MATH 1113.
- Program alignments under discussion with TCSG.
- Area G (institutional options—physical education—is under review to reduce the potential number of credit hours to complete a degree.
Plan for the Year Ahead:
- New IMPACTS implementation: Spring 2024
- New history Area F implementation: Spring 2024
- Resolution of physical education requirement: Fall 2024
- Changing ENGR 1100 and ENGR 1111 prerequisite/corequisite: Fall 2024
- Work with TCSG to make transfer to bachelor’s degree more seamless: Fall 2024
- Review of all program maps is ongoing.
Challenges and Support:
Challenges:
- One challenge is data warehousing and access since we do not have an IR director.
- We are critically short of staff in some areas, which makes a bigger picture focus more challenging.
Supports Needed:
- New data tools from the USG are very helpful—we would like to see more of that.
Primary Contact:
Mr. Jerry Oliver Jr., Director of Student Success, Advising and Testing
Dr. Victor Vilchiz, Dean of School of Nursing, Health, and Natural Sciences and Professor of Chemistry
Dr. Ed Whitelock, Department Head of Humanities and Fine & Performing Arts and Professor of English
Dr. Steve Raynie, Dean of Education, Math & Applied Sciences & Professor of English
Momentum Area:
Pathways
Change Management
Strategy/Project Description:
Advising Redesign which includes Faculty Mentoring. All Freshmen at GSC are assigned a professional advisor and faculty mentor. Advisors and faculty mentors work together to deploy touchpoints for each student.
Evaluation/Assessment plan:
KPIs:
|
Gordon State College Key Success Indicators for the Redesigned Student Success Model
|
|
General Key Success Indicators
|
|
First-Year Retention
Second Year Retention
First-Term Retention
Term GPA
Cumulative GPA
Average number of terms enrolled at GSC
Average Credit Intensity
Interaction of advising, academic support, block scheduling, faculty participation, NSO engagement
|
|
Student Success Activity
|
Success Indicators
|
|
Advising
|
# and % of first year students participating in 80% of touchpoints each term
# of credits completed in 1st year
% of First-Time Freshmen in 15 or more hours each term
% of First-Time Freshmen who complete math and English in first 30 hours
|
|
Advisor Performance
|
# and % of completed advising appointments and touchpoints (compared to expected)
# of touchpoints/first year student
# of touchpoints/second year student
Effect of advising touchpoints by date, type, student level
|
Current/most recent data (for each KPI):
For Fall 2023, we have not been able to consistently measure if students have officially participated in each touchpoint listed above. Advisors have been consistent with sending messages to students during the listed times but have not been consistent with reporting. The same is also true for our faculty mentors. We also have had inconsistent follow-up plans for early alert tracking. The percentage of faculty reporting early alerts have increased above 80%.
Time period/duration: 2023 going forward
Progress and Adjustments:
Training for advisors in the SSC has continued and we have now filled all vacant positions.
We still have outstanding items that need to be completed: Advising handbook, scheduling handbook, and a website refresh) Our provost will help us with the first two items as it involves multiple departments
Plan for the Year Ahead:
New IMPACTS implementation: Spring 2024 will bring about a new refresh on program maps for advisors and students to use
Working with our new IR hire to setup our data tracking for our KPIs
Work with enrollment services to assign advisors earlier.
SSC Advisors also supervise our Peer Tutors. There are plans to implement embedded tutoring Spring 2024 for high needs courses.
Challenges and Support:
Challenges:
One challenge is data warehousing and access since we do not have an IR director.
Another challenge is personality conflicts between advising staff and faculty/administration.
Software or processes to help advising staff setup degree plans and lock them so that students only are allowed to register for courses that are on their degree plans. (College scheduler has this ability, Augusta University uses this tool). This would help with CPOS
New leadership and no communication about plans that are being made
No committee to discuss Momentum or Student Success on a consistent basis
Support Needed:
New data tools from the USG are very helpful—we would like to see more of that
Primary Contact:
Mr. Jerry Oliver Jr., Director of Student Success, Advising and Testing
