Quality Initiative Summary Report

Success in Gateway Courses for All Students

This report represents the work that Northern Illiois University has undertaken to fulfill the quality initiative requirements of the Open Pathway during 2020-2023.

Overview of the Quality Initiative

1. Provide a one-page executive summary that describes the Quality Initiative, summarizes what was accomplished and explains any changes made to the initiative over the time period.

The Northern Illinois University (NIU) HLC Quality Initiative (QI), Success in Gateway Courses for All Students, supported NIU students to achieve their academic goals by improving student success and reducing equity gaps in gateway courses. At NIU, a gateway course is defined as one that is necessary for students to advance within a major or is required to complete general studies requirements. The courses that were targeted were those with low rates of success, high equity gaps, or both. The success rate is the percentage of students who enroll in the course and who earn a grade of A, B, or C. An equity gap exists when measurable differences in course outcomes are present in subgroups, as compared to the population.

The principal purpose of the QI project was to support all NIU students to achieve their academic goals by assessing, improving and modifying approaches in gateway courses to support higher levels of student success. Of particular importance was focusing on success for students from underrepresented populations. The QI project had the following goals:

• Identify and redesign gateway courses with low success rates or high equity gaps.
• Assess and deploy support for course transformation or other improvements in the identified courses to enhance student success.
• Monitor data from and engage in continuous quality improvement of identified courses to enhance student success in courses and beyond (e.g., retention and graduation).

In pursuit of these goals, we focused on factors that influence success rates, including (1) pedagogical practices (e.g., active learning, inclusive teaching, contextualization of learning), (2) academic supports (e.g., proactive advising, course sequencing, tutoring services, supplemental instruction) and (3) co-curricular supports (e.g., engagement, climate issues). Throughout the QI project, we identified the most relevant factors for our students and worked to scale the implementation of effective interventions. The project entailed an iterative process of identifying barriers to success, deploying interventions to overcome these barriers, assessing the interventions’ outcomes, and adjusting (e.g., scaling up or eliminating) interventions as appropriate.

The initiative aligned with the university’s goals and Strategic Action Planning Framework, was embedded within NIU’s more comprehensive Strategic Enrollment Management (SEM) Plan and included within the Illinois Equity in Attainment (ILEA) Equity Plan. Tailored, comprehensive action plans for both new central academic supports as well as college-specific curricular transformation and supports were developed and implemented, grounded in research-based approaches. The QI project positioned NIU to achieve a milestone in the context of the SEM and Equity plans: improvement in course success rates, leading to student academic progress and to degree attainment.

Of the 80 courses that were identified and prioritized for student success enhancement, the collective efforts of the QI resulted in improved DFUW rates in 40 courses and reduced equity gaps in 19 courses. Even more importantly, NIU has made significant strides to intentionally monitor student success data and use these data to inform faculty supports and student success efforts. NIU implemented several new faculty development and student support initiatives. We significantly increased the number of faculty who have been trained and are now implementing active, inclusive, and equitable pedagogy in their teaching. Institutional Research has created a dataset analogous to the baseline data set to measure future progress in reducing the number of courses with low success rates or high equity gaps.

Scope and Impact of the Initiative

2. Explain in more detail what was accomplished in the Quality Initiative in relation to its purposes and goals. (If applicable, explain the initiative’s hypotheses and findings.)

To address the goals of the QI, NIU set a three-year timeline and engaged in the following steps: (1) identified relevant courses; (2) planned and implemented strategic interventions for increasing student success in these courses based on research data and best practices; and (3) re-assessed student success in these courses and adjusted strategies as needed. The following summary of the highlights and notable accomplishments for each of these steps are provided to offer a glimpse into the comprehensive student success enhancement process that the campus engaged in.

(1) Identified Gateway Courses with Low Success Rates and High Equity Gaps

The initial identification of relevant gateway courses began in fall 2020 when the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Affairs, Chief Diversity Officer, and members of Institutional Effectiveness worked with key stakeholders, including college deans, associate deans, chairs, and members of the Strategic Enrollment Management Committee, to closely examine student success data. Utilizing the two platforms that we have for identifying courses and sharing information with stakeholders, Tableau and EAB’s Academic Performance Solutions (APS), we focused on course-level student success data (course grade distributions, DFW rates, and equity gaps) for 100- and 200-level courses over the past four academic years. Data was disaggregated by gender, race/ethnicity, first generation status and Pell eligibility.

After reviewing the data, the following criteria were established for prioritizing courses requiring transformation:

• Gateway courses (i.e., courses that students need to take to advance within a major or require to complete general studies requirements) with DFUW rates of 20% or greater and at least 25 enrolled students in the 2018-2019 and 2020-2021 academic years, and/or
• Courses with at least a 10% equity gap (i.e., success rates for students from under-served groups significantly less than the average success rate in the course) that impacted at least 10 students in the 2018-2019 and 2020-2021 academic years

NOTE: 2020-2021 data was omitted due to the pandemic anomaly of that academic year.

With these criteria for course prioritization, the team identified and prioritized 80 courses for review, transformation and student support interventions. After reviewing collegiate data, associate deans for curriculum worked with their college equity teams to establish a plan for reviewing and ultimately transforming identified courses.

(2) Planned and Implemented Strategic Interventions for Increasing Student Success in These Courses Based on Data and Best Practices

In conjunction with the review of student success data, a four-pronged data collection feedback model was established and then utilized to gather additional data, insights, feedback from faculty, administrators, student services professionals, and directly from undergraduate students. Data was collected and organized into six guiding categories that emerged from the feedback quadrants; student academic skills, structural supports, student motivation, pedagogy, outreach, and other.

Based on the student success metrics analysis and rich feedback that was gathered, the team identified strategies and tactics that aligned with the core goals of the QI.

Goal 1: Identify and redesign gateway courses with low success rates or high equity gaps

This first goal established regular reporting to relevant stakeholders of gateway courses with low success rates or high equity gaps as well as implementing comprehensive course-specific plans for redesigning courses to infuse inclusive and active learning pedagogies.

Goal 2: Assess and deploy support for course transformation or other improvements in the identified courses to enhance student success

While we initially planned to focus solely on course transformation and infusion of research-based pedagogical practices (e.g., active learning, inclusive teaching, contextualization of learning, etc.), it became clear through our data gathering and feedback that broader academic success supports were needed for incoming first-year students to support their success. To achieve this second goal, we recognized that we must embrace a holistic approach to enhancing student success.

Goal 3: Monitor data from and engage in continuous quality improvement of identified courses to enhance student success

Following the implementation of strategic interventions, institutional research gathered, analyzed and shared data. The team organized conversations held with key stakeholders about the success of the interventions and how to best adjust strategies. This iterative process was repeated enabling formative assessments to guide the direction of the interventions for student success and engage in continuous improvement.

Initiative Overview and Timeline

Year 1 (Academic Year 2020-2021)

The HLC approved NIU’s QI in spring 2021. Initial work had already begun in fall 2020 through the convening of the initial Steering Group and introductory meetings with Academic Affairs leadership to introduce the QI. The team highlighted currently available student success data and existing course transformation support resources. Through these initial conversations and analysis, the team established criteria and identified 80 target courses, using data from 2018-2019 and 2020-2021. Colleges were asked to initiate conversations within their academic programs on suggested interventions and collect feedback on support needed for potential course redesign.

The project was guided by a shared leadership framework and a Core Team was empowered to directly oversee and coordinate project activities moving forward. We began at this time to outline broader interventions aligned to the QI.

Year 2 (Academic Year 2021-2022)

At the start of the fall 2021 semester, an introductory meeting was held with those who had either taught the targeted courses in the past or who were scheduled to teach them in the current semester. The team introduced the QI and sought input on supports that would be most impactful. In addition, all faculty who had previously taught the identified courses were asked to complete a survey to understand why students might struggle in such courses and to seek recommendations from those faculty. The team analyzed the results, and shared them with the Steering Group. Those who were teaching identified courses received prioritized invitations to new professional development opportunities, including the ACUE Effective Teaching Practices certification course and ACUE Inclusive Teaching for Equitable Learning microcredential.

In spring 2022, the Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning (CITL) developed plans for interventions as well as course transformation ideas. These efforts began with sharing analysis and takeways from fall 2021 surveys of faculty teaching gateway courses as well as analysis of equity and student success outcomes from Fall 2021 compared with prior years. Each college provided status on initial course transformation and student success support efforts already underway and any additional institutional support needed.

To identify additional ideas as well as aid in prioritizing university-wide support interventions, an interdisciplinary team was formed with over 30 faculty and staff from across the institution, further described under question 6 below. Recommendations provided by the interdisciplinary team along with data from the previously discussed feedback model were analyzed using 2x2 prioritization matrix of targeted initiatives. Initiatives were selected by level of perceived impact in reaching the overarching goal of reducing DFWU rates in gateway courses and by level of departmental, college, or institutional priority.

Once priority areas were identified, corresponding strategies, resources and timelines for implementation were created. All interventions were reviewed to ensure they were well aligned to NIU’s vision, mission, and core values and relied on data-informed decisions and used best practices to support continuous quality improvement. Action plans were established and planning commenced for course transformation efforts and comprehensive student support enhancements to be implemented in the coming academic year. New course transformation assistance, including a faculty toolkit to support student success in gateway courses, along with new diversity/equity/inclusion training opportunities were launched. Prioritized tactics were included in the updated Strategic Enrollment Management Plan.

Year 3 (Academic Year 2022-2023)

During summer 2022, CITL assisted faculty in course transformation efforts in preparation for the fall 2022 semester, while other student-facing offices (such as the Huskie Academic Support center, the Center for Student Assistance, and others) developed new student support interventions. Both central and localized strategies and tactics were pursued in alignment with QI goals. The team continued to share student success data each semester and to check-in with each college to capture updates on various local initiatives and progress being made toward stated goals.

Examples of Key Central Interventions

Several new faculty and student support interventions were implemented during the QI, examples of four keystone initiatives are described below.

Examples of Key Localized Interventions

While numerous course transformation and student success efforts were already underway prior to the QI, many others were identified and piloted during the QI and are showing great promise for continuing to promote student success. A few such localized examples include:

(3) Re-assess Student Success in These Courses and Adjust Strategies as Needed

Following the implementation of strategic interventions, data was once again gathered, analyzed and posted in Tableau, and conversations held with key stakeholders about the success of the interventions and how best to adjust the strategies. In some cases, the interventions have proven successful and we’re examining how best to scale up for larger deployment as feasible. Still others need more time to fully realize results and are being monitored longer. Throughout the QI timeframe, this iterative process has been repeated, enabling formative assessments and multiple levels to guide the direction of the interventions for student success and engagement in continuous improvement. Institutional Effectiveness has created a dataset analogous to the baseline data set to measure future progress in reducing the number of courses with low success rates or high equity gaps.

3. Evaluate the impact of the initiative, including any changes in processes, policies, technology, curricula, programs, student learning and successes that are now in place in consequence of the initiative.

The impact of the initiative can be seen not only in the improvements that we’ve made generally in student success outcomes across many gateway courses but also in the tangible outcomes from the pilot support initiatives that were also implemented.

Of the 80 courses that were identified and prioritized for student success enhancement, the collective efforts of the QI resulted in improved DFUW rates in 50% of courses and reduced equity gaps in 24% of courses. Even more importantly, NIU has made significant strides to purposefully monitor student success data and use these data to inform local and central faculty support and student success efforts.

In comparing faculty participation in the support initiatives with outcomes in the identified courses, the Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning (CITL) has collected data on faculty participation and completion of offered high impact support programs to aid in the moderation of the continuous quality improvement efforts of identified courses. Fall 2022 data reflected the changes to course DFUW rates and equity gaps, and identified courses that decreased DFUW rates and narrowed the equity gaps. According to the data analysis, courses that were taught by faculty that engaged in CITL high impact programs made great strides and decreased their DFUW and equity gaps. In fact, 88% of improved courses that are now below the DFUW rate were taught by faculty that took advantage of CITL’s traditional levels of support, with almost 39% of courses taught by some if not all faculty that took advantage of high impact faculty support programs, including the Scaffolded Support for Teaching Gateway Courses or ACUE Effective Teaching Practices program. Similarly, strides were made in narrowing equity gaps, with 70% of courses that narrowed the gap below the threshold being taught by faculty that took advantage of CITL’s faculty teaching support programs and services. Conversely, courses that increased DFUW rates and/or widen equity gaps were taught by a lower percentage of faculty that took advantage of the available support. Courses with the highest decrease in DFUW rates were taught by faculty who participated in high impact professional development like ACUE and Scaffolded Support.

4. Explain any tools, data or other information that resulted from the work of the initiative.

Toolkit to Promote Student Success in Gateway Courses was created with curated resources to help faculty address the challenges that could be potential barriers to student success in gateway courses. As the common challenges student face are multi-faceted and interconnected, the intention of this toolkit was to provide a variety of potential strategies that may address each challenge.

The Scaffolded Support for Teaching Gateway Courses newsletters have been published publicly as a toolkit which can serve as an ongoing, just-in-time resource for faculty who are new to teaching in general or to teaching gateway courses.

The Faculty Academy for Cultural Competence and Equity (FACCE) curriculum of 10 professional development sessions that will be offered as a weeklong summer camp and then repeated in future academic years.

Student Success Tips and Tools were curated and share with faculty and students, offering guides with tips and practical strategies for student success.

5. Describe the biggest challenges and opportunities encountered in implementing the initiative.

The QI project provided invaluable opportunities for collaborations and discussions across the institution. This experience further strengthened NIU’s commitment to student success and degree completion through the development of new initiatives and strategies while also continuing to leverage the work that was underway prior to the development of the QI project. For example, the data collected as a result of this project guided targeted conversations within each academic college. The Core Team was able to share ideas from one college to the next in a formalized manner while also working together to provide suggestions back to the college representatives. As a result of these discussions, new programs and connections were made. Navigate trainings were brought directly to the instructors during new instructor orientation for many of the gateway courses, funding was redirected to support a peer learning model within several math courses. In addition, significant focus was directed to programming and structural supports for first year students, specifically to address the feedback from the students and faculty members such as modifying the content provided in New Student Orientation, adjusting the curriculum in First Year Seminars, and hiring ten additional academic advisors.

Commitment to and Engagement in the Quality Initiative

6. Describe the individuals and groups involved at stages throughout the initiative and the perceptions of its worth and impact.

A shared leadership framework was adopted for managing the initiative, consisting of both an executive team providing general oversight as well as a core team to oversee and coordinate project activities directly. Furthermore, an interdisciplinary team provided further input in identifying and prioritizing interventions and the committee of the curricular deans, consisting of the associate deans for curriculum for each of the colleges, were important partners in establishing and operationalizing college-specific interventions. The titles of the members of each of these shared leadership groups are provided below to exemplify the breadth of individuals from across campus who were involved in guiding the initiative and were vested in its success.

Additional Faculty and Staff Involvement

Beyond the shared leadership teams listed above, many additional faculty and staff members were engaged in the various local and centrally-supported efforts contributing to the QI. As just one example, the Scaffolded Support for Teaching Gateway Courses program was developed by staff of the Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning, who dedicated over 200 hours of time to research, write and distribute the newsletters, construct the toolkit, and facilitate the check-in reports.

7. Describe the most important points learned by those involved in the initiative.

Through the QI project we witnessed that sometimes even the smallest changes to course design, delivery, or supports can make a significant difference for students. And while faculty training and support coupled with course redesign efforts can impact student success outcomes, these efforts are amplified by support services tailored to the current student needs. We recognize that while we’ve made great strides we still have significant work to do to continue addressing equity gaps and student success rates and our commitment to student success is woven throughout the fabric of our institutional mission, vision, and values.

Resource Provision

8. Explain the human, financial, physical and technological resources that supported the initiative.

NIU has made a strong commitment to its Strategic Enrollment Plan and Equity Plan and the QI, which was embedded within these plans, likewise received strong commitment in terms of human, financial, technological and other resources.

As noted above, the initiative was supported at the highest level of the institution and a significant investment of personnel was made. The shared leadership framework that managed this initiative, consisting of the Executive Team (providing general oversight), Core Team (overseeing and coordinating project activities), Interdisciplinary Team (providing further input in identifying and prioritizing interventions), and Committee of the Curricular Deans (developing, implementing, and monitoring college and discipline-specific interventions at the local level) were all critical to the success of the initiative. In addition, the Executive Director of Institutional Research and Analytics who oversees Institutional Research provided data analyses for the project and added data to our Tableau platform. Finally, the Executive Vice President and Provost provided leadership to the shared leadership teams and communicated regularly about the QI with the Council of Deans and President’s Senior Leadership Roundtable.

To implement the QI, NIU had already invested heavily in and implemented the necessary software solutions including both Tableau as described above and, more recently, with Education Advisory Board (EAB) Academic Performance Solutions (APS) to promote data usage in this and other key initiatives. We also partnered with the Association of College and University Educators (ACUE) to expand faculty development in active pedagogical practice and inclusive teaching, credentialing to date 60 faculty in Effective College Instruction and 73 faculty and 48 graduate teaching assistants in Inclusive Teaching for Equitable Learning microcredential. Furthermore, NIU recently established the role of Executive Director for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion to oversee initiatives designed to support faculty in their efforts to advance their knowledge of equity and inclusion. The rollout of the new FACCE, Scaffolded Support, and Navigate initiatives required countless hours from many dedicated faculty and staff from across the institution. Furthermore, throughout the pandemic, NIU invested $1.2M in classrooms, replacing outdated classroom equipment such as computers, cameras and streaming devices and we expect to continue to devote resources to updating our classrooms to meet student needs. Finally, personnel in Institutional Research and other experts on campus provided statistical expertise in completing course analyses.

Plans for the Future (or Future Milestones of a Continuing Initiative)

9. Describe plans for ongoing work related to or as a result of the initiative.

The focus on student success and equity in gateway courses was magnified by the QI and will remain a lasting commitment. The established culture and practice of reviewing student success metrics each semester and revising instructional practices accordingly will continue to drive new equity and student success initiatives into the future. Faculty and staff now have tools and data available through Tableau, APS, and Navigate to see student success trends and to act quickly where concerns are noted. Our resulting student support can be much more agile, actively intervening during the semester.

The QI also propelled pilots for new initiatives, such as 8-week courses and course credit recovery modules, that have shown great promise and we plan to continue moving forward. We’ve also established and will be continuing to offer and further expand professional development on active teaching and inclusive teaching. We look forward to continuing to engage with NIU faculty credentialed as ACUE Distinguished Teaching Scholars and will be looking for ways to elevate further the influence of impact of these highly trained faculty on their fellow faculty members.

Finally, the Office of the Provost in collaboration with CITL launched a curricular innovation initiative to support development of cutting-edge pedagogies. This summer, twenty instructors will be supported to pursue techniques ranging from virtual reality to incorporation of more inclusive course materials.

10. Describe any practices or artifacts from the initiative that other institutions might find meaningful or useful and please indicate if you would be willing to share this information.

As previously mentioned, several new practices and artifacts resulted from the QI that have been shared widely and are available for other institutions to draw inspiration from, adopt, or modify, including:

• Student Success in Gateway Courses toolkit
• Scaffolded Support for Teaching Gateway Courses program and toolkit
• Student success tips and tools
• Faculty Academy on Cultural Competence and Equity (FACCE) curriculum
• Navigate faculty training, support resources, and coordinated care model
• ACUE effective teaching practices program and distinguished teaching scholars
• Curricular innovation grants