Time well spent: Flipped classrooms and effective teaching practices.
Fassett, K., BrckaLorenz, A., Strickland, J., & Ribera, A.
In E. Alqurashi Fostering Student Engagement with Instructional Technology in Higher Education ICI Global, 2019.
Good teaching practices are the crux of student education and require constant evaluation to meet current generations' learning needs. Flipped classrooms have sought a foothold in higher education to provide opportunities for deep learning through the delivery of content online prior to attending class while having activities related to processing and applying the information during class. Using a large-scale, multi-institution study of faculty teaching flipped courses, this study empirically links flipped procedures to other forms of effective educational practice and additionally focuses on the motivations and impacts on the faculty side of this pedagogical practice. Findings indicate numerous learning and development benefits for students with implications for supporting and motivating faculty across disciplines, faculty identities, and course types.
Full version

Creative cognitive processes in higher education
Miller, A. L., & Dumford, A. D.
The Journal of Creative Behavior, 50(4), pp. 282–293, 2016.
This paper explores whether or not students in higher education settings are using creative cognitive processes, how these processes are related to deep approaches to learning, and in what types of settings and students these processes are most prevalent. Data collected from 8,724 students at 17 institutions participating in the 2010 National Survey of Student Engagement suggests that first-year and senior students employ several different creative cognitive processes in their everyday activities. Results from exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses suggest two distinct types of processes: deliberate creative processes and intuitive cognitive processes. Additional analyses indicate significant positive relationships between both types of creative processes and deep approaches to learning, as well as statistically significant differences in the use of creative processes based on gender, enrollment type, and type of institution. Potential reasons for and implications of these findings are discussed.

The contributions of writing to learning and development: Results from a large-scale multi-institutional study
Anderson, P., Anson, C. M., Gonyea, R. M., & Paine, C.
Research in the Teaching of English, 50(2), 199-235, 2015.
Conducted through a collaboration between the Council of Writing Program Administrators(CWPA) and the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), this study identified and tested new variables for examining writing‘s relationship to learning and development. Eighty CWPA members helped to establish a consensus model of 27 effective writing practices. Eighty US baccalaureate institutions appended questions to the NSSE instrument based on these 27 practices, yielding responses from 29,634 first-year students and 41,802 seniors. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) identified three constructs: Interactive Writing Processes, Meaning-Making Writing Tasks, and Clear Writing Expectations. Regression analyses indicated that the constructs were positively associated with two sets of established constructs in the regular NSSE instrument--Deep Approaches to Learning (Higher-Order Learning, Integrative Learning, and Reflective Learning)and Perceived Gains in Learning and Development as defined by the institution‘s contributions to growth in Practical Competence, Personal and Social Development, and General Education Learning--with effect sizes that were consistently greater than those for the number of pages written. These were net results after controlling for institutional and student characteristics, as well as other factors that might contribute to enhanced learning. The study adds three empirically established constructs to research on writing and learning. It extends the positive impact of writing beyond learning course material to include Personal and Social Development. Although correlational, it can provide guidance to instructors, institutions, accreditors, and other stakeholders because of the nature of the questions associated with the effective writing constructs.
Full version

College seniors' plans for graduate school: Do deep approaches learning and Holland academic environments matter?
Rocconi, L. M., Ribera, A. K., & Nelson Laird, T. F.
Research in Higher Education, 56(2, Special Forum Issue), 178–201, 2015.
This study examines the extent to which college seniors‘ plans for graduate school are related to their tendency to engage in deep approaches to learning (DAL) and their academic environments (majors) as classified by Holland type. Using data from the National Survey of Student Engagement, we analyzed responses from over 116,000 seniors attending 499 four-year institutions. Findings revealed a significant positive relationship between seniors‘ uses of DAL and plans for earning a graduate degree. Further, seniors majoring in Investigative and Social environments were more likely to hold higher degree expectations. Significant interaction effects by DAL and Holland academic environment were also found. The impact of DAL on graduate degree expectations was greater for seniors majoring in Artistic environments than otherwise similar students in Investigative, Enterprising, or Social environments. In addition, the impact of DAL on degree expectations was greater for seniors in Enterprising environments than otherwise similar students in Social environments.
Full version

Creative cognitive processes in higher education
Miller, A. L., & Dumford, A. D.
The Journal of Creative Behavior, 50(4), pp. 282–293, 2014.
This paper explores whether or not students in higher education settings are using creative cognitive processes, how these processes are related to deep approaches to learning, and in what types of settings and students these processes are most prevalent. Data collected from 8,724 students at 17 institutions participating in the 2010 National Survey of Student Engagement suggests that first-year and senior students employ several different creative cognitive processes in their everyday activities. Results from exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses suggest two distinct types of processes: deliberate creative processes and intuitive cognitive processes. Additional analyses indicate significant positive relationships between both types of creative processes and deep approaches to learning, as well as statistically significant differences in the use of creative processes based on gender, enrollment type, and type of institution. Potential reasons for and implications of these findings are discussed.

High-impact practices and the first-year student
Tukibayeva, M., & Gonyea, R. M.
New Directions for Institutional Research, 2013(160, Special Issue), 19–35, 2014.
High-impact practices?programs and activities in which students commit considerable time and effort in different settings?can help to define the first-year college experience and are likely to increase success in areas like persistence, deep learning, and self-reported gains.

Examining effective faculty practice: Teaching clarity and student engagement
BrckaLorenz, A., Ribera, T., Kinzie, J., & Cole, E. R.
To Improve the Academy, 31, 149–160, 2012.
As colleges and universities shift to a learning- centered paradigm, a growing emphasis is being placed on understanding which teaching practices are effective in promoting student learning (Barr & Tagg, 1995). Reviewing the literature, there are varying ideas on what constitutes effective teaching; however, one that is often referenced when discussing the characteristics of effective teaching is teaching clarity (Feldman, 1989; Hativa, Barak, & Simhi, 2001; Sherman et al., 1987). Teaching clarity can be thought of as a teaching method where faculty demonstrate a level of transparency in their approach to instruction and goal setting in an effort to help students better understand expectations and comprehend subject matter (Ginsberg, 2007b). This includes providing examples and summarizing key points of lectures (Chesebro & McCroskey, 2001; Myers & Knox, 2001). Teaching clarity has been shown to have a positive effect on key outcomes of an undergraduate education (see Chesebro & McCroskey, 2001; Myers & Knox, 2001; Pascarella, Edison, Nora, Hagedorn, & Braxton, 1996). Unfortunately, little is known about the extent to which students are exposed to specific teaching clarity behaviors and the relationship to other important elements of an undergraduate education, such as student engagement, deep learning, and self-reported gains.

Going deep into mechanisms for moral reasoning growth: How deep learning approaches affect moral reasoning development for first-year students
Mayhew, M. J., Seifert, T. A., Pascarella, E. T., Nelson Laird, T. F., & Blaich, C. F.
Research in Higher Education, 53, 26–46, 2012.
The purpose of this paper was to determine the effects of deep approaches to learning on the moral reasoning development of 1,457 first-year students across 19 institutions. Results showed a modest positive relationship between our measures of deep approaches to learning and moral reasoning at the end of the first year of college even after controlling for precollege moral reasoning. After accounting for a host of demographic and relevant student characteristics and for the natural clustering of students, we found that the integrative learning subscale, which captures students' participation in activities designed to integrate information from varied sources and diverse perspectives, positively affected moral reasoning among first-year students. Implications for researchers and practitioners are discussed.

Independent colleges and student engagement: Do religious affiliation and institutional type matter?
Gonyea, R. M., & Kuh, G. D.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2006.
This study extends previous work on the relationships between student engagement in spirituality-enhancing activities during college and selected student and institutional variables. Using the same data set and many of the same dependent variables as an analysis performed for the Teagle Foundation, this study for CIC examined more extensively the influence of institutional variables including multiple categories of religious affiliation, Carnegie classification, and control (public/private). Block hierarchical regression models were used to estimate the relationships between institutional type characteristics and nine dependent variables. Religious affiliation explained the most variance on three dependent variables ? participating in spiritual activities (worship), gains in spiritual development (gnspirit), and gains in ethical development (gnethics). Students at faith-based institutions scored the highest on these dimensions, followed by Roman Catholic and Other Protestant-affiliated institutions. At the same time, students attending non-affiliated, private institutions did not differ in any appreciable way from their public school peers, with both groups generally engaging least often in spiritual activities. Although the effects were not as strong as with religious affiliation, students attending private institutions scored higher than their public school counterparts in certain areas such as participating in spiritual activities, engaging in deep learning, and in self-reported growth in spirituality, ethical development, personal and social development, and intellectual skills. The findings indicate religiously affiliated colleges and universities are not all alike and that there is more to learn about how institutional mission and environments influence student engagement and learning.
Full version

Promoting student success: Creating conditions so every student can learn
Chickering, A. W., & Kuh, G. D.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2005.
Accommodating diverse learning styles of students has long been espoused as a principle of good practice in undergraduate education. Much progress has been made during the past two decades in using active, collaborative, and problem-based learning, learning communities, student-faculty research, service learning, internships, and other pedagogical innovations to enrich student learning. Variable time blocks are more common--from three hours, to all day, to weekends, to six or eight weeks--to fit the desired outcomes, content, and processes. Peers tutor other students, deepening their own learning in the process. Increasingly sophisticated communication and information technologies provide students access to a broad range of print and visual resources and to an expanded range of human expertise. A wider range of assessment tools document what and how well students are learning. Despite all this activity, at too many schools these and other effective educational practices are underutilized. The suggestions offered here are drawn in large part from a study of 20 diverse four-year colleges and universities that have higher-than-predicted graduation rates and, through the National Survey of Student Engagement, demonstrated that they have effective practices for fostering success among students of differing abilities and aspirations. These institutions clearly communicate that they value high quality undergraduate teaching and learning. They have developed instructional approaches tailored to a wide range of student learning styles, ensuring that students engage with course content and interact in meaningful ways with faculty and peers, inside and outside the classroom.
Full version

Promoting student success: Making place matter to student success
Manning, K., & Kuh, G. D.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2005.
Some campuses have a ?special? feel about them. Students are quick to mention that they cannot imagine a better place for them personally or--for that matter--any better setting for a college or university. The college has become their home away from home, the place they‘d rather be than any other. Generations of graduates return for reunion weekends, passing through familiar buildings and pausing at favorite spots that evoke fond recollections of what was a very meaningful time in their lives. Built structures and memories are inextricably intertwined to form deep emotional ties to the institution and to those with whom they shared this place. Colleges and universities with such a palpable sense of place also have salutary effects on student success. In a uniquely human way, this powerful connection to something larger than oneself encourages students to engage with faculty, staff, and peers in meaningful ways and compels graduates to give back to alma mater by contributing their time, talents, and resources. Administrators at other colleges long to understand and create the conditions that bond people so tightly to the institution and to one another during and after graduation.
Full version

Promoting student success: Small steps senior administrators can take
El Khawas, E.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2005.
Colleges and universities can increase the number of students who graduate by making a number of small, strategic changes in institutional policies and practices. Some schools have done this by focusing on effective educational practices and empowering faculty, staff and students to work together in new, productive ways. Others have improved the campus climate for learning by carefully assessing what students are experiencing or by realigning resources to induce students to participate in activities associated with persistence and other desired outcomes of college. Senior administrators play a key role in such efforts when they speak plainly and consistently about the importance of student success and make decisions congruent with this priority. The suggestions offered here are drawn from a study of 20 diverse four-year colleges and universities that have higher-than-predicted graduation rates and, through the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), demonstrated that they have effective practices for fostering success among students of differing abilities and aspirations. These institutions--called DEEP schools here because they were studied for the project on Documenting Effective Educational Practices--clearly communicate that they value high quality undergraduate teaching and learning, and provide effective, well-linked academic and support services. Despite constraints, they have found ways to create supportive learning environments, ensuring that students engage with course content, faculty and peers, inside and outside the classroom.
Full version

Promoting student success: The importance of shared leadership and collaboration
Kezar, A.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2005.
Collaborative, shared leadership among administrators, students, faculty, and staff is a key component to creating campus environments that foster student success. Collaborative work groups can be powerful vehicles for launching and institutionalizing student-friendly policies and practices and for developing complementary programs such as first-year initiatives, fresh approaches to general education curricular offerings, service- learning, and student leadership development programs among others. Such initiatives almost always result in richer learning opportunities for students when done collaboratively than when an individual unit develops them. But collaborative approaches to leadership and program development do not come naturally within higher education institutions that reward individualistic endeavors over collaboration. The guiding principles offered here for promoting shared leadership and collaboration are based on an in-depth examination of 20 diverse four-year colleges and universities that have higher-than-predicted graduation rates and, as demonstrated through the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), effective policies and practices for engaging their students.
Full version

Promoting student success: Using financial and other resources to enhance student success
Jacobs, B. A., & Schuh, J. H.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2005.
Howard Bowen (1996) wryly observed decades ago that colleges and universities raise all the money they can, and then they spend it. His point was that institutions have more good ideas than they can fully fund. As a consequence, they are constantly making choices as to how to best use their finite resources. Where and how resources are allocated reflect institutional priorities ideally guided by a deliberate planning process that values and supports student success. The principles that follow for using financial and other resources to enhance student learning are based on an in-depth examination of 20 diverse four-year colleges and universities that have higher-than-predicted graduation rates and, as demonstrated through the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), effective policies and practices for engaging their students. These institutions illustrate that it is not necessarily the amount of resources an institution allocates that is important to student success but how financial resources, faculty and staff time, and facilities are linked to create powerful, affirming learning environments.
Full version

Promoting student success: What accreditation teams can do
Griego, E.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2005.
The process of accreditation review in the U.S. serves two primary functions: quality assurance and continual improvement. The experienced educators who voluntarily serve on accreditation teams apply common standards of quality that serve students and meet public accountability expectations and offer suggestions and recommendations for institutional consideration and improvement. In the last decade, regional accreditation commissions and national professional and specialized accreditation agencies have increasingly focused on student learning results and institutional improvement. There has been a corresponding shift in focus from institutional resources, structures, and inputs as the primary indicators of institutional quality, toward increased emphasis on student learning results, appropriate to the degree level and mission of the institution. Accreditation review team reports are rich sources for examples of institutional practices that engage student learning. What have not been readily available to accreditation teams, however, are compilations of examples of good institutional practice. The suggestions offered here are drawn in large part from a study of 20 diverse four-year colleges and universities that have higher-than-predicted graduation rates and, through the National Survey of Student Engagement, demonstrated that they have effective practices for fostering success among students of differing abilities and aspirations. These institutions?called DEEP schools here because they were studied for the project on Documenting Effective Educational Practices?clearly communicate that they value high quality undergraduate teaching and learning.
Full version

Promoting student success: What advisors can do
De Sousa, D. J.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2005.
Students who are well prepared academically and highly motivated tend to do well in college and persist to graduation. But for various reasons?some of which are beyond their control?many students lack the requisite academic background for college-level work. As a result, most colleges and universities enroll students with a wide range of abilities. Some of these institutions are more effective than others in helping their students succeed in college. These schools recognize that in terms of learning and personal development, what students bring to college is less important than what they do when they get to college. Academic advisors can play an integral role in promoting student success by assisting students in ways that encourage them to engage in the right kinds of activities, inside and outside the classroom. Advisors are especially important because they are among the first people new students encounter and should see regularly during their first year. The guiding principles offered here are based on an in-depth examination of 20 diverse four-year colleges and universities that have higher-than-predicted graduation rates and demonstrated through the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) that they have effective policies and practices for working with students of differing abilities and aspirations. These institutions are referred to below as either educationally effective schools or high-performing institutions.
Full version

Promoting student success: What business leaders can do
Lovett, C. M.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2005.
More than any other group of stakeholders, business leaders are aware that this country‘s ability to remain competitive in a global, technology-based economy is ever more closely tied to its ability to produce more and better prepared college graduates. Graduating more students from various backgrounds who are well prepared to meet the social, civic and economic challenges of the future is a national priority. Every college and university can improve its graduation rates and enhance the quality of its undergraduate programs by creating the conditions that matter to student success. Decades of research studies show that student engagement--the time and effort that students devote to their studies and related activities--is a key factor in student success. The Documenting Effective Educational Practice (DEEP) project gathered data from 20 very different institutions of higher learning whose student scores on the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) were higher than what was predicted on the basis of their student and institutional profile, history, and other factors.
Full version

Promoting student success: What campus leaders can do
Kuh, G. D.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2005.
Graduating more students and increasing the quality of their learning are national priorities. Every college and university can improve in these areas by focusing on the educational conditions that matter to student success. Decades of research studies show that a key factor is student engagement--the time and effort students devote to their studies and related activities and how institutions organize learning opportunities and provide services to induce students to take part in and benefit from such activities. The guiding principles offered here are based on an in-depth examination of 20 diverse four-year colleges and universities that have higher-than-predicted graduation rates and demonstrated through the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) that they have effective policies and practices for working with students of differing abilities and aspirations. These institutions value high quality undergraduate teaching, diversity and support for all students. They clearly communicate and hold students to high standards, provide timely feedback, and encourage students to actively engage with course content and faculty and peers, inside and outside the classroom. When they complement the institution‘s mission and values, these conditions can create powerful learning environments that lead to desirable learning outcomes that are generally independent of institutional resources or students‘ background.
Full version

Promoting student success: What department chairs can do
Schuh, J. H., & Kuh, G. D.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2005.
Department chairs are in a position to help shape a culture where student learning is the central focus of faculty, staff, and students (Gmelch & Schuh, 2004). They hire, socialize, and evaluate faculty members‘ performance, guide curriculum development, and maintain the quality of academic programs. At the same time, department chairs typically assume the role without any specific preparation for the position; many have little or no experience as academic administrators. Yet, they are expected to lead their peers in establishing and implementing departmental goals and objectives. If improving educational effectiveness and enhancing student learning are priorities, what should the department chair emphasize? The suggestions offered here are based on an in-depth examination of 20 diverse four-year colleges and universities that have higher-than-predicted graduation rates and higher-than-predicted scores on the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). Taken together, these measures suggest that their policies, programs, practices, and campus climates challenge and support students of differing abilities and aspirations. How might these ideas be applied to your department?
Full version

Promoting student success: What faculty members can do
Kinzie, J.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2005.
What students do in college matters as much as anything else in terms of their educational success. Educationally effective colleges and universities--those that add value to the student experience--intentionally craft policies and practices that channel students‘ energy to the activities that matter to student learning. Students who participate in collaborative learning activities such as service-learning, coherent first-year programs, peer tutoring and senior capstone projects are more likely to persist and succeed--especially when these programs and practices are well conceived and delivered in an effective, coordinated manner. An essential ingredient is an unwavering, widespread commitment to enhancing student learning on the part of faculty members. The suggestions offered here are based on an in-depth examination of 20 diverse four-year colleges and universities that have higher-than-predicted graduation rates and demonstrated through the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) that they have effective policies and practices for working with students of differing abilities and aspirations. These institutions value high quality undergraduate teaching, diversity, and support for all students. They clearly communicate and hold students to high standards, provide timely feedback, and encourage students to actively engage with course content, faculty and peers, inside and outside the classroom. When they complement the institution‘s mission and values, these conditions can create powerful learning environments that lead to desirable learning outcomes that are generally independent of institutional resources or students‘ background.
Full version

Promoting student success: What new faculty need to know
Cambridge, B. L.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2005.
Starting a new position is exhilarating. The key challenge is to make the strange familiar as soon as possible. There are new policies to learn, new colleagues to get to know, and new surroundings to adapt to. All these aspects and more need to be understood and managed well in order to focus on the primary task at hand--teaching and learning. Of all that is new, to what should you attend first if you are committed to creating the conditions under which students learn best? How can you use your institution‘s resources to help your students take advantage of opportunities to deepen their learning? The suggestions offered here are based on an in-depth examination of 20 diverse four-year colleges and universities that have higher-than-predicted graduation rates and demonstrated through the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) that they have effective policies and practices for working with students of differing abilities and aspirations. Consider adapting some of their approaches to assist new faculty at your institution.
Full version

Promoting student success: What SHEEOs and system heads can do
Ewell, P. T.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2005.
States benefit considerably when their stocks of ?educational capital? grow. From a workforce and tax revenue standpoint, state rates of return on baccalaureate education are far higher than those associated with any other educational step. Additional benefits attributable to higher education?ranging from enhancements in citizen participation to improved health and avoidance of public support?are equally easy to document. It is, thus, in every state‘s interest to increase the numbers of its citizens who attain a baccalaureate degree. And it is equally in every state‘s interest to ensure that those who do earn a degree have experienced the kind of high quality learning environments that yield levels of knowledge and skills that are nationally and internationally competitive. Every college and university can improve its graduation rates and enhance the quality of its undergraduate programs by creating the conditions that matter to student success. Decades of research studies show that one key factor is student engagement?the time and effort that students devote to their studies and related activities. Institutions can organize their classes and other learning opportunities so that students put more effort in and benefit more from such activities. SHEEOs and System Heads can do their part by ensuring that matters of undergraduate quality and student success remain central to the state‘s approaches to planning, resource allocation, and accountability. And while their direct responsibility remains largely confined to public institutions, they can increasingly establish policies that affect independent institutions as well.
Full version

Promoting student success: What student affairs can do
Whitt, E. J.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2005.
Interest in creating the conditions that enhance student learning and support students in achieving their educational goals is at an all-time high. Four-fifths of high school graduates need some form of postsecondary education to acquire the knowledge, skills, and competencies necessary to address increasingly complex social, economic, and political issues. Student engagement--what students do during college--generally matters more to what they learn and whether they persist to graduation than who they are or even where they go to college. The contribution of out-of-class experiences to student engagement cannot be overstated. Any institution that wishes to make student achievement, satisfaction, persistence, and learning a priority must have competent student affairs professionals whose contributions complement the academic mission of the institution in ways that help students and the institution realize their goals. The ?lessons‘ for student affairs practice offered here are based on an in-depth examination of 20 four-year colleges and universities that have higher-than-predicted graduation rates and, as demonstrated through the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), effective policies and practices for engaging their students.
Full version

Promoting student success: What student leaders can do
Magolda, P.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2005.
Student leaders reap many benefits and rewards as a result of their involvements with campus organizations. In addition to enjoying the respect of their peers, they have opportunities to meet a variety of faculty, staff and students, exposing them to a range of different personalities and cultures. They typically grow in self confidence and practical competence as they learn how to manage their time, energy, and their group‘s financial resources. In addition, the challenges they encounter in the course of these and other activities draw them out of their comfortable patterns of thinking and responding to situations, helping them to become more flexible, responsive, and reflective (Kuh, 1995; Kuh & Lund, 1994). In addition to these personal benefits, student leaders can contribute much to the quality of the learning environment, the experiences of their peers, and the larger campus community. Unfortunately, too often these potentially positive effects are not fully realized. Student governments get sidetracked on trivial issues. Social organizations inadvertently discourage participation by students from diverse backgrounds. Service clubs touch in relevant ways only a small fraction of those who need assistance. Established campus governance structures ignore or limit active, meaningful involvement by students.
Full version

Promoting student success: What the media and the general public need to know
Kuh, G. D., & Kinzie, J.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, 2005.
After several years of intense public focus on the need to improve K-12 education, more attention has turned recently to what happens when high school graduates move on to college. Students, parents, and lawmakers are asking whether undergraduates are getting adequate value for their investments of time and money, particularly as college and university tuition keeps rising. Employers are expressing concern about whether some graduates are adequately prepared for the world of work. Demographic pressures in some states also mean that institutions have to find places for more students, even though state appropriations to many public institutions have been cut or are barely increasing. In addition, legislators and policy experts are pressing institutions to make it possible for students to complete degree requirements in a reasonable period of time and worry that significant dropout rates at some colleges and universities may reflect a waste of public resources spent on those students.
Full version

Time well spent: Flipped classrooms and effective teaching practices
Fassett, K. T., BrckaLorenz, A., Strickland, J., & Ribera, A.
American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Toronto, Canada, 2019, April.
Good teaching practices are the crux of student education and require constant evaluation to meet current generations‘ learning needs. Flipped classrooms have sought a foothold in higher education to provide opportunities for deep learning through the delivery of content online prior to attending class while having activities related to processing and applying the information during class. Using a large-scale, multi-institution study of faculty teaching flipped courses, this study empirically links flipped procedures to other forms of effective educational practice and additionally focuses on the motivations and impacts on the faculty side of this pedagogical practice. Findings indicate numerous learning and development benefits for students with implications for supporting and motivating faculty across disciplines, faculty identities, and course types.
Full version

Livin' on a prayer: A quasi-experimental investigation into the efficacy of learning communities
Fosnacht, K., & Graham, P. A.
American College Personnel Association Annual Convention, Montreal, QC, Canada, 2016, March.
With the increasing adoption of learning communities by post-secondary institutions, it is imperative to document their effectiveness, as the existing research is not definitive. In this study, we found that learning communities have a positive impact on students‘ engagement and perceived gains using a quasi-experimental approach, confirming previous research; however, learning communities do not appear to drastically alter the student experience on average. Additionally, we found that the estimated effect of learning communities varies widely across institutions on a variety of measures. Consequently, it appears that while some learning communities are extremely impactful, others have a negligible impact on students.
Full version

Going deep into mechanisms for moral reasoning growth: How deep learning approaches affect moral reasoning development for first-year students
Mayhew, M. J., Seifert, T. A., Pascarella, E. T., Nelson Laird, T. F., & Blaich, C. F.
Association for the Study of Higher Education Annual Conference, Indianapolis, IN, 2010, November.

Disciplinary differences in faculty members' emphasis on deep approaches to learning
Nelson Laird, T. F., Schwarz, M. J., Kuh, G. D., & Shoup, R.
Association for Institutional Research Annual Forum, Chicago, IL, 2006, May.
?Deep learning? is important in higher education because students who utilize such an approach tend to get more out of their educational experiences. As learning is a shared responsibility between students and faculty, it is equally important to examine how much faculty members emphasize deep approaches to learning as it is to assess how much students employ these approaches. This study examines disciplinary differences in faculty members‘ emphasis on deep approaches to learning. On average, faculty in education, arts and humanities, and social science fields emphasize deep learning more than their colleagues from other disciplinary areas, which is not entirely consistent with findings from a previous study on students.
Full version

Measuring deep approaches to learning using the National Survey of Student Engagement
Nelson Laird, T. F., Shoup, R., & Kuh, G. D.
Association for Institutional Research Annual Forum, Chicago, IL, 2006, May.
The concept of deep learning is not new to higher education. However, deep learning has drawn more attention in recent years as institutions attempt to tap their student‘s full learning potential. To more fully develop student talents, many campuses are shifting from a traditional passive, instructor-dominated pedagogy to active, learner-centered activities. Using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis on multiple years of data from the National Survey of Student Engagement, this study examines the structure and characteristics of items about student uses of deep approaches to learning. Institutions and researchers can use the resulting scales to assess and investigate deep approaches to learning.
Full version

Deep learning and college outcomes: Do fields of study differ?
Nelson Laird, T. F., Kuh, G. D., & Shoup, T. R.
Association for Institutional Research Annual Forum, San Diego, CA, 2005, May.

Full version

Aligning deep learning with classroom time use: A view of disciplinary variations among faculty
Hiller, S., BrckaLorenz, A., & Nelson Laird, T.
Association for the Study of Higher Education Annual Conference, Portland, OR, 2019, November.
This exploratory study seeks to reimagine research into disciplinary differences in teaching approaches through multilevel methods that allow the examination of over 100 specific disciplines. Findings suggest that focusing on broad categories of disciplines could mask underlying variations in how faculty approach teaching.
Full version

A look within: STEM faculty emphasizing deep approaches to learning
Dumford, A. D., Ribera, A. K., & Nelson Laird, T.
Association for Institutional Research Annual Forum, Denver, CO, 2015, May.
Disciplinary culture plays a significant role in the extent faculty emphasize and students‘ engage in deep approaches to learning. This study narrowly focuses on STEM faculty and the variation in their emphasis on two components of deep learning--reflective and integrative learning and higher-order learning. Specifically, patterns in faculty promoting deep approaches to learning in mathematics, biology, mechanical engineering, computer science, physics, and psychology are examined. The effect of gender in these fields is also considered.
Full version

Degree aspirations and deep approaches to learning
Ribera, A. K., Rocconi, L. M., & Nelson Laird, T. F.
Association for Institutional Research Annual Forum, Long Beach, CA, 2013, May.
Engagement in deep approaches to learning has been linked to several beneficial outcomes, such as higher GPAs, retention of course material, and critical thinking skills. Previous studies indicated that higher degree aspirations have positive effects on student outcomes. This study investigated the relationship between students‘ levels of degree aspirations and their engagement in deep approaches to learning. Findings demonstrated that students with higher degree aspirations engaged more frequently in deep approaches to learning. However, this relationship was not consistent across discipline areas; for instance, compared with other academic disciplines, the effect of degree aspirations on deep learning was strongest for arts and humanities majors.
Full version

Supporting first-generation students: The role of learning communities to promote deep learning
Cole, J. S., McCormick, A., & Kinzie, J.
Association of American Colleges & Universities Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, 2009, January.

Full version

Improving deep learning on campus: Lessons from NSSE and FSSE
Nelson Laird, T. F., & Kinzie, J. L.
Collaboration for the Advancement of College Teaching & Learning, Bloomington, MN, 2007, November.

Deep learning, liberal education, and institutional practice: Emerging findings, provocative lessons
Kuh, G. D., Nelson Laird, T. F., Kinzie, J., & Tagg, J.
Association of American Colleges & Universities Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, 2006, January.

Full version

Deep learning: Lessons from twenty campuses
Kuh, G. D., & Kinzie, J.
AAHE National Conference on Higher Education, Atlanta, GA, 2005, March.

Higher-Order Learning
In A fresh look at student engagement—Annual results 2013, 10.
Full version

Reflective & Integrative Learning
In A fresh look at student engagement—Annual results 2013, 10.
Full version

Deep Approaches to Learning
In Promoting student learning and institutional improvement: Lessons from NSSE at 13—Annual results 2012, 10.
Full version

Online Learners
In Promoting engagement for all students: The imperative to look within—2008 results, 15 - 16.
Full version

Student Writing
In Promoting engagement for all students: The imperative to look within—2008 results, 21 - 22.
Full version

Promising/Disappointing Findings
In Experiences that matter: Enhancing student learning and success—Annual report 2007, 13.
Full version

Learning Communities
In Experiences that matter: Enhancing student learning and success—Annual report 2007, 14 - 15.
Full version

Research with Faculty
In Experiences that matter: Enhancing student learning and success—Annual report 2007, 15 - 16.
Full version

Study Abroad
In Experiences that matter: Enhancing student learning and success—Annual report 2007, 17.
Full version

Academic Advising
In Experiences that matter: Enhancing student learning and success—Annual report 2007, 23.
Full version

Reflective Learning
In Engaged learning: Fostering success for all students—Annual report 2006, 20 - 21.
Full version

Deep Learning Across Fields of Study
In Exploring different dimensions of student engagement—2005 annual survey results, 17.
Full version

Religion and Spirituality
In Exploring different dimensions of student engagement—2005 annual survey results, 21 - 22.
Full version

Deep Learning
In Student engagement: Pathways to collegiate success—2004 annual survey results, 20 - 21.
Full version

Integration of Knowledge and Experience
In Converting data into action: Expanding the boundaries of institutional improvement—2003 annual report, 15.
Full version