• Skip to Content
  • Skip to Main Navigation
  • Skip to Search

NSSE logo

NSSENSSENSSE

Open Search
  • NSSE
    • About NSSE
      • Conceptual Framework
      • Positions and Policies
      • Advisors
      • Partners
      • Employment
    • Survey Instruments
      • Topical Modules
      • Engagement Indicators
      • High-Impact Practices
    • Registration Details
      • Pricing
      • Campus Contacts
      • Administration Checklist
    • Administering NSSE
      • Population File
      • Customizing NSSE
      • Recruitment Method
        • Folder Name
      • Encouraging Participation
      • Terms of Participation
      • Accessibility
      • Data Security
    • Reports & Data
      • NSSE Administration Overview
      • Data Files
      • Sample Report
      • Institutional Report Guide
      • Report Builder
      • Data Summaries & Interactive Displays
    • Working with NSSE Data
      • Data Codebooks
      • Syntax
    • Psychometric Portfolio
      • Response Rates
    • NSSE Shorts (New)
      • Pricing and Registration
      • Administration Instructions
      • Item Sets
      • Reports & Data Use
      • Dashboard LogIn
  • FSSE
    • FSSE Portal Log-in
    • About FSSE
    • Survey Instruments
      • Main Survey
        • FSSE Scales
        • Disciplinary Areas
      • Topical Modules
      • Consortium Questions
    • Registration & Pricing
    • Administering FSSE
      • Administration Overview
      • Confidentiality
      • Customization
        • Preparing for Message Delivery
        • Population File Instructions
      • Data Security
      • IRB Protocol
        • Informed Consent
      • Locating Your Data & Results
      • Sample Reports
        • Administration Summary
        • FSSE Respondent Profile
        • FSSE Topical Module Report
        • FSSE Disciplinary Area Report
        • FSSE-NSSE Combined Report
        • FSSE Frequency Report
        • FSSE Snapshot Report
      • Terms of Participation
    • Findings, Data, & Reports
      • FSSE Overview
      • Content Summaries
      • Data Visualizations
      • Data Use Examples
    • Working with FSSE data
      • Using FSSE Data
      • Analysis Resources
      • Data User's Guide
    • Psychometric Portfolio
  • BCSSE
    • About BCSSE
    • BCSSE Survey
      • BCSSE Scales
    • Fall Check-In
    • Registration & Pricing
    • Administering BCSSE
      • Administration Protocol and Procedures
      • BCSSE Contacts
      • Demonstration Dashboard Portal
      • Institution Participation Agreement
      • IRB
      • Data Security and Accessibility
    • Reports & Data
      • BCSSE Overview
      • Accessing BCSSE Data
      • Summary Tables
    • Working with BCSSE data
      • Additional Resources
    • Dashboard Log-in
  • Support & Resources
    • For Participating Institutions
      • How Institutions Use Their Data
        • Lessons from the Field
          • Institution Examples
        • NSSE Data Use in Brief
        • Search for examples
        • Displaying Results
        • Data Use Teams
      • Data & Results Guides
        • Student Success Mapping
        • Navigating Your Institutional Report
        • Tips for More Inclusive Data Sharing and Analysis
        • Data User's Guide: Sense of Belonging
        • Accreditation Toolkits
        • Sharing and Disseminating NSSE Results
        • NSSE Data User’s Guide
        • Campuswide Mapping
        • Contextualizing NSSE Effect Sizes
        • Custom Analysis
      • Workshops and Webinars
    • For Partnerships
      • Special Projects
    • For Students & Parents
      • Pocket Guide
        • English
        • Spanish
    • For All Audiences
  • Research
    • Annual Results
      • Annual Results 2023
        • Special Report 1
        • Special Report 2
      • Annual Results 2022
        • 1. Rebounding Engagement
        • 2. Digging Deeper Into HIP Quality
        • 3. Hot Topics in Higher Ed
      • Past Annual Results
    • Publications & Presentations
      • Foundational Publications
      • Featured Publications
      • Recent Presentations
      • Lessons from the Field
      • DEEP Practice Briefs
      • Search
    • NSSE Essentials
    • NSSE Sightings (blog)
      • Search Posts
  • Institution Login
  • BLOG
  • Contact Us

Our Research: Projects,
Publications, and More

  • Home
  • NSSE
    • About NSSE
    • Survey Instruments
    • Registration Details
    • Administering NSSE
    • Reports & Data
    • Working with NSSE Data
    • Psychometric Portfolio
    • NSSE Shorts (New)
  • FSSE
    • FSSE Portal Log-in
    • About FSSE
    • Survey Instruments
    • Registration & Pricing
    • Administering FSSE
    • Findings, Data, & Reports
    • Working with FSSE data
    • Psychometric Portfolio
  • BCSSE
    • About BCSSE
    • BCSSE Survey
    • Fall Check-In
    • Registration & Pricing
    • Administering BCSSE
    • Reports & Data
    • Working with BCSSE data
    • Dashboard Log-in
  • Support & Resources
    • For Participating Institutions
    • For Partnerships
    • For Students & Parents
    • For All Audiences
  • Research
    • Annual Results
    • Publications & Presentations
    • NSSE Essentials
    • NSSE Sightings (blog)
  • Search
  • Institution Login
  • BLOG
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Research
  • NSSE Sightings (blog)

In name only? Assessing Quality and Equity in High-Impact Practices

Brendan Dugan

Monday, January 25, 2021

Often lauded as transformational educational experiences, High-Impact Practices (HIPS) play a key role in the undergraduate experience. Yet the success of these practices depends in part on implementation that may vary between programs and institutions. The eagerness to label practices high-impact, or to focus exclusively on participation in these activities, may have distracted educators and administrators from ensuring these activities provide the particular and rich kind of experience that makes them so beneficial (Kuh & Kinzie, 2018).

With support from Lumina Foundation, we set out to assess the quality of HIPs, surveying over 20,000 U.S. college students about their experiences at close to five dozen institutions in the spring of 2019. The information presented here is elaborated in our full report (Kinzie et al., 2020).

What makes it "High-Impact?"

Kuh and O'Donnell (2013) identified eight key ingredients that make for high-impact educational activities that are distinct from the typical classroom experience. To be considered a HIP, an activity must involve:

  • Performance expectations set at appropriately high levels
  • Significant investment of time and effort by students over an extended period of time
  • Interactions with faculty and peers about substantive matters
  • Frequent, timely, and constructive feedback
  • Experiences with diversity wherein students are exposed to and must contend with unfamiliar people and circumstances
  • Periodic, structured opportunities to reflect and integrate learning
  • Opportunities to discover relevance of learning through real-world applications
  • Public demonstration of competence.

Using these as a guide, we designed a survey that mapped these eight elements to questions about the HIP to assess the quality of the experience. For this set of questions, we considered seven practices - first-year seminars, service-learning, learning communities, undergraduate research, internships or teaching experiences or the like, study abroad, and culmination senior experiences - although there are others. The NSSE asks students about their participation in all of these, except first-year seminars.

Once data were collected, we set thresholds for each of the above elements to gauge whether the experience met expectations. For instance, for a HIP to require a sufficiently "significant investment of time and effort" we proposed that students must report spending at least "more time" on the activity than their typical learning experiences. However, some HIPs place greater weight on certain elements than others. We reviewed relevant scholarship on HIPs, judging which of those elements seemed to be emphasized more than others, so that we could share results that were more attenuated to the particular experiences, and more valuable to practitioners and educators.

The chart below illustrates the share of students within each HIP that met our criteria for "high-quality," with larger proportions shaded darker. Cells with the percentage shown were those elements strongly emphasized in the literature, and those without were emphasized, but not strongly. Cells are shaded white where the elements are not emphasized in the literature.

For example, having substantive interactions with faculty and peers is a crucial part of what makes undergraduate research a valuable experience. About two in three students who participated in undergraduate research met our quality criteria for this element, meaning they met frequently with faculty, and those meetings focused on what was being learned in the experience. An even greater share (88%) met our quality criteria for having rich feedback from their faculty or supervisor, but our review of the literature did not identify this as a crucial component. Only 20% of students in undergraduate research said they frequently interacted with people different from themselves or often found themselves in unfamiliar circumstances - our criteria for high-quality experiences, which was not a focus of existing research (white cell).


Between 40% to 70% of students across HIPs met our criteria for high-quality experiences, with some exceptions. A fair number of students were in HIPs that demanded significant time and effort, where they received timely feedback from faculty, where they reflected on what they had been learning in their experiences, and could discover the relevance of their learning to the "real world." That few students had high-quality diversity experiences in first-year seminars and service-learning courses might alarm educators ("But my service-learning course really challenges my students!"), but the goal of this project was to assess quality, and provide useful diagnostic information about the practices.

Addressing Equity in HIPs

One of the goals of this project was to examine equity in the quality of HIPs - that is, do students of color or first-generation students report similar levels of quality in their HIPs as other students? While limited to students participating in HIPs, we hoped to identify where, if at all, equity gaps may occur.

The following plot describes the share of white students and underrepresented minority (URM) students (in this case, Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, and Native American or Alaska Native) who met our criteria for high quality across the elements. While in many cases the proportions are similar, some noticeable differences exist. For instance, a slightly greater share of URM students in first-year seminars met our quality thresholds for receiving rich feedback and having substantive interactions with faculty and peers, but a slightly smaller share in internships and culminating senior experiences felt the experiences demanded significant time and effort.

Overall Quality in HIPs

Though useful for its level of detail, it can be difficult to appreciate the picture of quality painted by these eight dimensions. That's why we developed a simpler metric of overall quality: the sum of the elements that were high quality, detailed in the box-and-whisker plot below. Across HIPs, students met our criteria for between four and seven of the nine elements on average. Students in study abroad and internships, teaching experiences, or the like, tended to make the cut for the greatest number of quality elements. Those who had done research with faculty had fairly consistent, and fairly high-quality, experiences, while there was a bit more variation in the quality of the experience among those in service-learning courses.

It is our hope that the survey, the literature matrix, and data shared with Lumina Foundation and the participating institutions can push educators and practitioners to move beyond "mere participation" and turn a critical, constructive eye toward understanding the qualities that make HIPs "high-impact."

See more findings and details in our full report.

Resources

Kinzie, J., McCormick, A. C., Gonyea, R. M., Dugan, B., & Silberstein, S. (July 2020). Assessing quality and equity in high-impact practices: Comprehensive report. Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research. https://nsse.indiana.edu/research/special-projects/hip-quality/index.html

Kuh, G., & Kinzie, J. 2018, May 1. What really makes a 'high-impact' practice high impact? Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2018/05/01/kuh-and-kinzie-respond-essay-questioning-high-impact-practices-opinion

Kuh, G., & O'Donnell, K. 2013. Ensuring Quality & Taking High-Impact Practices to Scale. Washington, DC: Association of American College and Universities.

  • Annual Results
  • Publications & Presentations
  • NSSE Essentials
  • NSSE Sightings (blog)
    • Search Posts

Evidence-Based Improvement in Higher Education resources and social media channels

  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • YouTube

RELATED SITES

  • Center for Postsecondary Research
  • Indiana University Bloomington School of Education

Evidence-Based Improvement in Higher Education

Center for Postsecondary Research
Indiana University School of Education
201 N. Rose Avenue
Bloomington, IN 47405-1006
Phone: 812.856.5824
Contact Us


NSSE, FSSE, BCSSE, and the column logo are registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Accessibility | Privacy Notice | Copyright © 2021 The Trustees of Indiana University

Center for Postsecondary Research | Indiana University Bloomington School of Education