• Abstract
• Background and Methodology
• Results:
  Use of Time
  Academic and Intellectual Experiences
  Assignments, Course Preparations, and Examinations
  Mental Activities
  Academic Enrichment Activities
  Educational and Personal Growth
  Opinions about Your School
• Summary and Conclusions
• Reference
• FSSE Item Responses (BGSU only)

ABSTRACT

This report describes the results of the pilot test of the Faculty Survey of Student Engagement (FSSE) completed by 270 BGSU faculty in the Spring of 2003. The FSSE was designed by national assessment experts to measure faculty expectations for student engagement in educational practices that are known to be empirically linked with high levels of learning and development, along with how faculty use these practices in their work with students. The results of the FSSE, when used in concert with the results of the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), are intended to be a catalyst for productive discussions related to teaching, learning, and the quality of students' education experience."

BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY

The Office of Institutional Research (IR) conducts regular periodic assessment of student engagement in educational practices. One of our principal means of data collection is the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) , a survey of undergraduate students that was developed at the Indiana University Center for Post-Secondary Research & Planning. This year a new instrument has been pilot tested in conjunction with the NSSE on campus. That new tool is the Faculty Survey of Student Engagement (FSSE).

The FSSE is a project coordinated by NSSE team. It was designed to parallel NSSE's survey of undergraduate students . Rather than examining student engagement, FSSE focuses on: (1) Faculty perceptions of how often their students engage in different activities; (2) The importance that faculty place on various areas of learning and development; (3) The nature and frequency of faculty-student interactions; and (4) How faculty members organize class time and related activities. "FSSE is not meant to be a faculty evaluation. Rather, it provides institutions with an opportunity to compare faculty perceptions and student reports about educational opportunities and practices on their campus." (NSSE, 2003)

More than 16,000 faculty members at 147 colleges and universities participated the 2003 pilot test of the survey. BGSU faculty who subscribed to the faculty listproc were asked to respond the survey online this spring. A total of 270 of the surveys were completed. The response rate is about 25%, which is lower than the estimated average institution response rate of 43%.

There is a high degree of race/ethnicity similarity between survey respondents and the overall faculty population. Females (54% for sample vs. 44% for population) and full-time faculty members (83% for sample vs. 73% for population), however, were over-represented. These limitations and the low response rate require that results from the survey be interpreted with some caution.

Respondents were asked to identify a particular undergraduate course that they teach and use it as the basis for responding to the survey. Of the total 270 BGSU faculty respondents, 122 of them identified themselves as lower division faculty (the students in their identified course sections are mostly first year students and sophomores) and 137 of them identified themselves as upper division faculty (the students in their identified course sections are mostly juniors and seniors). The class size for most of the identified course sections, both at lower division and at upper division, is between 10 and 49 students. The course subjects for most of lower division classes are Arts and Humanities (29.8%), Other (22.3%), Social Science (18.2%), and Physical Science (16.5%). The course subjects for most of upper division classes are Education (19.9%),  Arts and Humanities (19.9%), Other (16.2%), Social Science (14.0%), and Business (12.5%). Roughly 60% of the respondents reported that they have taught the identified course sections four times or more prior to this spring.

FSSE results were analyzed by noting the percentages of participants who provided various responses to the survey items. Percentages may not always sum to 100 due to rounding. Responses were compared with those of two other peer universities*. They were also compared with the 2003 NSSE results

* Two Peer Universities:
George Mason University
Northern Arizona University

USE OF TIME

About how many hours do you spend in a typical week doing each of the following?

Most of the BGSU faculty spent five hours or more per week teaching class, 1-8 hours per week preparing for class, grading papers, giving feedback to students, reflecting on and revising class activities, interacting with students outside of the classroom, and 4 hours or less per week advising undergraduate students, working with undergraduates on research, supervising internships/other field experiences, and working with students on activities other than course work. BGSU lower division faculty were less likely than upper division faculty to engage with undergraduate students in terms of advising as well as supervising internships or other field experiences.

Compared with their counterparts in peer universities, BGSU faculty who taught lower division courses spent fewer hours per week advising undergraduates, and BGSU faculty who taught upper division courses spend fewer hours per week grading papers.

In your selected course, on average, what percent of time is spent on the following:

Like the faculty in peer universities, BGSU faculty were more likely to spend their class time in lecture or class discussion than in other activities listed in the table above. Faculty who taught upper level courses were more likely to spend time in student presentations than did faculty who taught lower level courses. BGSU lower division faculty were more likely than their counterparts in peer universities to spend time in seminar, teacher-student discussion, student presentations, computer mediated activities, and small group activities.

ACADEMIC AND INTELLECTUAL EXPERIENCES

Less than half of the faculty respondents, both at BGSU and in peer universities, reported that 50% or more of students in their selected course sections engaged in the activities listed in the table above.

Compared with upper division faculty, lower division faculty were more likely to report that sometimes 50% or more of their students came to class without completing readings or assignments. They were less likely than upper division faculty to claim that half or more of their students used e-mail to communicate with them, talked about grades or career plans with them, frequently ask questions in class or contributed to class discussions, and worked harder than they usually do to meet an instructor's standards.

Compared with the student respondents at BGSU, BGSU faculty were more likely to say that students often come to class without finishing their homework, but less likely to report that students often or very often engaged in all the other activities listed in the table above.