Teaching and Learning at CSUS :
Perceptual Measures of Learning
A teacher affects eternity; (s)he can never
tell where her/his influence stops.
--Henry Adams
CSUS has always identified itself as a teaching institution, one in which the
pursuit of excellence in teaching is of critical importance. The dimension of teaching and
learning, therefore, is an important theme upon which to focus the University's Self-Study
efforts. The Steering Committee wanted to explore what was happening in our
classrooms--how instructors instruct, how learners learn, and what everyone thinks about
the process. The Committee decided it had to move beyond the prevalent "culture of
anecdote" to a "culture of evidence"--in other words, to create an environment that
replaced the telling of ostensibly representative stories with more objective and supportable
information.
Toward that end, the Steering Committee launched the most far-reaching and
systematic survey of perceptions about pedagogy and related issues in the history of this
campus. The goals were threefold: (1) to produce a comprehensive profile of student,
faculty, and alumni perceptions of teaching and learning at CSUS; (2) to establish a
baseline against which the results of future departmental self-studies and program reviews
could be measured; and (3) to suggest a range of questions about teaching and learning that
would engage the campus community during and after the WASC Self-Study. Ultimately,
the results will be used as a basis for decision-making. There has been significant progress
toward each of these goals. While Chapter 3 in Phase I primarily focused on teaching
effectiveness, this chapter will focus on student perception of outcomes.
Teaching and Learning will be operationally defined using these six outcomes:
student perceptions of General Education, Major, Faculty Teaching Practices, Intellectual
Stimulation, and Library and Information Resources; and Overall Perception. (A point of
terminology: although Library, e.g., can be seen as an input, student perception of
Library adequacy is regarded as an outcome.)
We describe each outcome and list its survey indicators. Tables and graphs
summarize the percentages of positive responses for each of the indicators. Positive
responses typically come as response options such as "excellent" or "good;" "very
satisfied," or "satisfied." Neutral responses ("fair," "somewhat satisfied," "undecided")
and negative responses ("poor," "unsatisfied," "disagree") are not reported but can be
found in the appendices to Phase I of the WASC Self-Study.
3.1 Overall Perception: Students leaving CSUS are satisfied with the
overall quality of the instruction they received at CSUS.3.2 Perception of General Education: Students leaving CSUS are
satisfied with the contribution General Education made to their
personal development.3.3 Perception of Major: Students leaving CSUS are satisfied with the
technical skills and professional preparation acquired while enrolled
in a major area of study at CSUS.3.4 Perception of Faculty Teaching Practices: Faculty employ effective
teaching practices.3.5 Perception of Intellectual Stimulation: CSUS intellectually
stimulates and inspires students.3.6 Perception of Library and Information Resources: CSUS provides
students with the library and information resources necessary to
complete a superior university degree.
overall quality of the instruction they received at CSUS. Indicators for this global
outcome came from two sources: (1) survey questions that ask respondents to rate CSUS
as, for instance, "excellent," "good," "fair," or "poor" and (2) indicators that ask
respondents for their inclination to engage in some behavior such as "recommending CSUS
to another person."
Indicators of Overall Perception:
The overall impression of CSUS, as measured by three different survey
instruments, was generally positive. On the ACT Alumni Survey (ACT Alum), better than
four out of five respondents rated CSUS positively. The same survey found that 82% rated
the overall quality of instruction positively. Across all of the indicators in this outcome
category, three of every four evaluations were positive (76.5%).
For some reason, the quality ratings tended to be much higher than the behavioral
indicators. Among those responding to the ACT Alumni survey, 85% rated CSUS as
"excellent" or "good." By contrast, the Student Needs and Priorities Survey (SNAPS) of
enrolled students found that only 46% would repeat the behavior of attending CSUS.
Similarly, only 57% of those responding to the ACT Graduating Senior Survey (ACT
Grad) would choose CSUS if they had it to do all over again. Perhaps many of those
hypothetical responses not to attend CSUS were more the result of immediate practical and
temporal student concerns than they were the result of negative attitudes toward CSUS.
The exception to this inconsistency between attitudes and behavior came from the ACT
Alumni Survey. Here, 77% of the respondents said they would attend CSUS all over
again.
It was disappointing to discover that more CSUS students would not
"recommend CSUS to others." Only 70% of the respondents to the ACT Graduating
Senior Survey, and 61% of the respondents to the SNAPS Survey, said they would
recommend CSUS to others. This is an indicator that needs to be taken seriously. One
would hope that future measurements of outcomes will find a higher percentage of
interviewees recommending CSUS to students seeking higher education.
In looking at much of the same data, the WASC Steering Committee came to the
same conclusion in Phase I of the Self-Study. The committee concluded that, in general,
student perceptions of CSUS are markedly favorable. A significant majority of graduating
students surveyed in the ACT Grad survey in Spring 1995 reported positive perceptions of
the University.
A majority of enrolled students who responded to the SNAPS survey had positive
perceptions of the instructional experience at CSUS (Appendix G). Sixty-one percent
reported being pleased with their "experiences at this University," and 61 percent said they
"agreed" or "strongly agreed" with the question that asked them if they "would recommend
this University to others."
Similarly encouraging were alumni responses to the question, "How would you
rate the university?" Thirty-one percent responded "excellent," 56 percent responded
"good," 12 percent responded "average," while only two percent responded "poor." (ACT-
Alumni Survey, 1995)
The WASC Committee noted contradictions in some of the overall perceptual
data. For instance, 31 percent of the alumni respondents rated the University as "excellent"
and 56 percent rated it as "good." On the other hand, 46 percent said they would
recommend it only "with reservation." Similarly, 33 percent said they would definitely
attend CSUS if they had it to do over again, 46 percent said "probably yes," 13 percent
responded "uncertain," and 7 percent said "probably no." In some respects, this is less than
unbridled enthusiasm. It might be useful to explore the degree to which teaching
effectiveness may have something to do with these mixed feelings.
3.2 Perception of General Education - General education serves a wide
variety of purposes. The goals of General Education include fostering intellectual growth
and moral development as well as increasing understanding and appreciation of the arts.
Ultimately, general education should contribute to students' personal growth and prepare
them for effective citizenship. Generally stated, the desired outcome is that Students
leaving CSUS are satisfied with the contribution General Education made to their
personal development.
Indicators of General Education:
A significant finding from this entire assessment of perceived CSUS outcomes is
that students are leaving CSUSnot satisfied with the contribution General Education has
made to their personal development. Generally speaking, only half of the respondents
believed that General Education was a valuable component of their education. The mean
percentage of positive responses (51.7%) was the lowest of any of the six perceptual
measures of learning discussed in this chapter. Clearly this conclusion, based on several
measures, seems valid. Indeed, three of the lowest percentage scores came from a survey
that was specifically designed to measure perceptions of General Education.
The lowest scores appeared to cluster around the ability of General Education to
do as the name implies, generalize. For some students General Education did not "help
(them) deal more effectively with personal, moral or social problems" (47% positive),
largely failed to be "used... in my major coursework" (36% positive), and was not "used...
in work, social, volunteer or other activities apart from school" (29% positive). On the
other hand, 81% of the respondents to the ACT Graduating Senior's Survey did rate their
intellectual growth (acquiring knowledge, skills, ideas, concepts, and analytical thinking)
as "very great" or "great." Both General Education and major coursework include these
goals.
The WASC Steering Committee similarly noted that fewer than half of the
graduating students said that their education at CSUS prepared them "very much" or
"much" to participate effectively in the electoral process, to recognize their rights,
responsibilities and privileges as citizens or to gain insight into human nature through the
study of literature, history, or the arts.
While it may be the case that alumni are simply now reporting the lack of
something in their education that they themselves did little to embrace, it may also be the
case that their recollection of the CSUS curriculum, and that of graduating students as well,
reflects an emphasis in the classroom on the transmission of information to the exclusion of
an examination of questions related to values and their roles as citizens. If so, this is cause
for concern given the promise in the University's Mission Statement that "[CSUS] will be
known for graduating students with the knowledge and skills to assume productive roles in
society."
The WASC Steering Committee was concerned about several aspects of the
University's General Education program, both its pedagogy and intended goals. A
comparison of General Education with "major" teaching (Appendix K) found that good
teaching practices in virtually every category are reported less frequently--sometimes
dramatically so--in General Education courses compared to major courses. Seventy-one
percent of the graduating students indicated that professors in major courses had high
expectations and were willing to help them "almost always" or "frequently" compared to 55
percent of the students enrolled in General Education courses. Similarly, 70 percent of the
graduating seniors, and only 46 percent of the General Education students, noted that
instructors use a variety of teaching methods "almost always" or "frequently." Seventy-five
percent of the graduating seniors compared to 46 percent of the General Education students
claim that faculty knew their names "almost always" or "frequently." Less than 50 percent
of the General Education students indicated that they needed to use the library to complete
assignments, compared to 71 percent of the graduating students. More cooperative learning
experiences, both in and out of the classroom, appear to occur in major courses than in
General Education courses.
Some members of the WASC Steering Committee observed that a good many
students at a comprehensive university, such as CSUS, consider General Education a
hurdle to be surmounted before they can get on to what matters to them--their major. To be
sure, the survey asked students to recall specific classroom practices, and not to express
their general impression toward the program itself. That said, there can be no guarantee that
their attitudes toward General Education did not enter into the results. (The complexity of
the program and its seeming arbitrariness have been suggested as possible explanations for
the somewhat negative student views of the program.)
Although 61 percent of the graduating students indicated that most of their
General Education coursework was completed at CSUS, exactly how much is not known.
More than 75 percent of the undergraduate student population at CSUS transfer primarily
from community colleges. While the students may not be critiquing our General Education
program specifically, the responses indicate perceptual differences in students' experiences
of General Education and major courses.
Other explanations of the perceived differences between General Education and
major courses can be offered. Some faculty may resent General Education courses almost
as much as the students; they might prefer teaching an upper-division specialty course.
Their displeasure may be communicated to their students. Large class enrollments in some
General Education courses may discourage faculty from using the same classroom practices
in General Education that they use routinely in major instruction.
Whatever the explanation, the question of pedagogy and general education is
clearly one that has been raised by this inquiry and should be pursued. Student resistance to
the program or not, it is precisely the General Education program that separates CSUS
from, say, those proprietary universities that primarily specialize in professional career
development and training.
3.3 Perception of Major - While many students might be willing to give
CSUS a pass on its General Education program and still rate the university as excellent or
good, it is doubtful they would be so lenient with regard to their major area of study. With
the major comes important and immediate personal concerns with their own future careers.
Hence, this outcome is critical: Students leaving CSUS are satisfied with the technical
skills and professional preparation acquired while enrolled in a major area of study at
CSUS.
Indicators of Major:
For the most part, student satisfaction with the major was markedly better than
satisfaction with General Education. Four out of every five alumni reported that they were
either "very satisfied" or "satisfied" with their major. More to the point, better than two-
thirds of all the responses to indicators of the "major" outcome were positive.
There was, however, a large variability among the scores achieved by different
indicators. Although the performance of most majors in "providing a broad knowledge of
theories and principles" was superior (84% positive), its performance in providing
"preparation for a future occupation" was much less satisfactory (46% positive).
Interestingly, three of the four highest scoring indicators came from the Phone
Registration (CASPER) data. While this may be indicative of the University's success with
this particular outcome, it may be an artifact of the scale used to conduct the CASPER
survey. "Positive" on the CASPER survey was operationally defined as "exceptionally"
plus "more than adequately." The response category of "more than adequately" may not,
however, be an unambiguously positive response. Although the logistics of an automated
telephone interview limit choices, authors of future CASPER surveys might want to
experiment with more conventional response categories.
If a need is suggested by these data, it would come in the area of specific career
preparation. Most University departments appear to provide students with the methods and
practices of respective professions, along with necessary technical skills. A more frequent
shortcoming, however, involves the transition to a career or profession. Only 46%
expressed confidence in their preparation for their future occupations. It may be that
students believe they are technically equipped to begin a career, they simply feel
unprepared about getting started in their chosen career. Given the apparent desire for
assistance, academic departments might consider offering professional seminars within the
major area of study or engaging student professional organizations in this effort.
3.4 Perception of Faculty Teaching Practices - Not surprisingly, given its
central importance, faculty teaching practices has the longest list of indicators, covering all
aspects of the student-teacher interaction. We would like students to report that Faculty
employ effective teaching practices.
Indicators of Faculty Teaching Practices:
There was little consensus across surveys, even among similarly worded survey
questions. For example, the indicators relating to prompt returns ranged from a high of
81% positive on the ACT Graduating Seniors Survey to a low of 68% on the ACT Non-
returning Students Survey.
On the other hand, there appeared to be greater consistency within surveys, even
across dissimilar indicators. For example, the six indicators drawn from the ACT Non-
Returning Students (ACT Non) survey were among the thirteen lowest ranked indicators.
By contrast, with the exception of the item relating to "teaching methods," eight of the
fourteen highest ranked indicators came from the ACT Graduating Seniors Survey.
Common sense would suggest that those who succeed by graduating would be happier
with their instructors than those who leave school or transfer before achieving their degree.
Responses to the survey on teaching practices, administered to General Education
classes, were the most varied. A variety of the lowest ranked indicator, teaching methods,
received only a 46% positive response from students. Among the higher ranked items,
"enthusiasm" of General Education instructors was viewed positively by 79% of the
respondents.
Overall, 69% of the responses to the twenty different items measuring perception
of faculty teaching practices were positive. Except for the ACT Graduating Seniors Survey,
many of the lowest scores seemed to come from items pertaining to feedback and
responsiveness. This may be an area where instructors need to focus their efforts at self-
improvement. Similarly, the "variety of teaching methods" scored low (69% positive ACT
Graduating Seniors and 46% positive General Education Student Survey). The one topic
that scored the highest across all instruments was "enthusiasm and enjoyment of teaching."
Eighty-three percent of the respondents to the ACT Graduating Seniors Survey said that
instructors "always" or "frequently" displayed such enthusiasm.
3.5 Perception of Intellectual Stimulation - The outcome of intellectual
stimulation centered on two dimensions: (1) challenging and motivating students, and (2)
exposing students to new ideas and the free exchange of new ideas. As a university, CSUS
has a vested interest in achieving this outcome:CSUS intellectually stimulates and
inspires students.
Indicators of Intellectual Stimulation:
Student perception of CSUS on all indicators of intellectual stimulation was mild
in comparison with most of the other outcomes. The overall mean positive response of
63.6% was second lowest among the six outcomes summarized in this chapter. However,
none of the indicators scored better than 72% positive. Even the outcome relating to general
education had at least one indicator in the 80% plus range. This is clearly an outcome where
CSUS could improve.
Unlike the previous outcome of faculty teaching practices, there seemed to be no
positive bias on the part of respondents to the ACT Graduating Senior Survey. Both the
highest and lowest ranked indicators, respectively, came from the ACT Graduating Senior
Survey. The question measuring student perception that the University challenge to think
received a 72% positive response. The question measuring the perception that CSUS
broadens student's interests received only a 56% positive response.
3.6 Perception of Library and Information Resources - All of the
surveys seemed to have one or two items measuring this outcome: CSUS provides
students with library and information resources necessary to complete a superior
university degree. Indicators came from three categories: library services, library materials
and facilities, and library usage. One indicator from the ACT Non-returning Students
Survey did double duty and measured both the facilities and services.
Indicators of Library Perceptions:
With the possible exception of required library usage, the library outcome scored
very well. Were it not for the outcome of overall impression of CSUS, the library outcome
would have had the best rating of any of the outcomes. Seventy-four percent of the
responses to this outcome were positive. Were one of the indicators not present, the mean
percentage of positive responses would have been 78%, which would have made it the
highest rated outcome.
Most interesting was the fact that the highest rated indicator came from the ACT
Non-returning Students Survey. Typically, scores from this survey were comparatively
low. But in this instance, the ACT Non-returning Students indictor achieved a positive
score of 84%.
Both services and facilities scored very well. A high percentage of students were
happy with the library. The only low score came from an indicator which asked if the
library was necessary to complete course assignments. Only 49% of the respondents to the
General Education Survey answered that the library was required "almost always" or
"frequently." This would appear to be more of an indictment against general education that
against the library.
A similar question was not asked regarding use of the library in major courses.
Students were asked about the frequency of their library use in the CASPER survey. Here
75% reported that they had used the library five or more times during the semester to
complete course assignments such as research papers.
Much of the data summarized in this chapter points to a teaching culture at CSUS
that is appreciated by a good majority of the University's students and alumni. Particularly
in the major, teaching effectiveness is reported by students to be generally high--both in
terms of general satisfaction and when considered in the context of what the literature has to
say about effective teaching practices. The WASC Steering Committee found student
perception of experience in General Education more problematic. The table below compares
the mean percentage of positive responses for all six outcomes summarized in this chapter.
Clearly, the perceived problem area for students is General Education.
