response

First discussion from another student(please respond)

What are the conclusions about program performance in the report? Are they justified based on the available data or evidence? 

Overall, I was able to see that there was a significant amount of increase of students who were actually becoming part of the interactive opportunities provided within the school especially in the school years of 2015 and 2016. Even though there was a significant amount of increase, their involvement within student programs had some level of stability with reference to the retention rates. This is something that I do believe were more likely to be able to participate in even given the amount of recommendations provided with in the report.

What did the evaluators identify as “issues they will need to manage over the next few years” that might conceivably be assessed at a later date? Be prepared to identify two and justify why you would make them a priority (OSU Student Affairs Annual Report, p. 11).

I was able to see that the department and school environment did lack some IT positions. I think that this impacted the level of interactive web experiences in addition to the growing demand of the diverse student population group. Secondly, I do believe that the finances had a significant amount of impact on the way that individuals were able to create some level of revenue increase eventually. Even though this was a primary cause of the impact, not having enough funds was of course a fundamental principle for decrease in quality and accessibility.

Which questions could you not answer? Where could you try to find information that is not in the document?

I think the most important focus area that was not able to be reflected upon was the impact of understanding of the program, especially with reference to the criteria that were selected. This was a reference point that I do believe individuals should take into consideration given the outcomes of how these population groups were divided.

2nd response from another student (please respond)

My responses to the analysis questions for Oregon State University's Division of Student Affairs Annual Report are below. 

8. What are the conclusions about program performance in the report? Are they justified based on the available data or evidence?

· After reviewing the report a few times, I found that there was a general increase in performance with the indicators and metrics being measured. For example, from 2016-2017 to 2017-2018 school years, there was an increase from 14 to 58 programs that offered a service-learning component (Division of Student Affairs, 2019, p. 1). In 2017, 72% of students interacted with the student affairs department compared to 96% in 2018 (Division of Student Affairs, 2019, p. 2).

· The report also showed a decrease in performance for funding during the 2017-2018 year. The Oregon State University Foundation reported that the Division of Student Affairs raised $695,589.45 as opposed to nearly $3,000,000 for the 2016-2017 school year (Division of Student Affairs, 2019, p. 4)

· For some metrics, there were no previous school years to compare data to evaluate for effectiveness or if improvements needed to be made. For example, during the 2017-2018 school year, 230 staff members attended the 3 Student Affairs Educators Forum sessions, "some attending more than one" (Division of Student Affairs, 2019, p. 3). No other information is given regarding goals to increase attendance among staff members, or other metrics to establish that this data point as being successful. 

 

9. What did the evaluators identify as “issues they will need to manage over the next few years” that might conceivably be assessed at a later date? Be prepared to identify two and justify why you would make them a priority (OSU Student Affairs Annual Report, p. 11).

· One issues listed was the number of first-year to graduating undergraduate students interacting with diverse others given a specific category of difference. The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) first conducted this analysis in the Spring 2016 (Division of Student Affairs, 2019, p. 1) According to the report, the number of diverse interactions will increase as students progress through their program. The data is scheduled to be updated Spring 2019 and will be used to report to the U.S. News and World Report for the university's ranking (Division of Student Affairs, 2019, p. 1).

· The second issue was a "10-year divisional capital plan totaling over $360 million that will be funded through self-support revenue and student-voted fees" (Division of Student Affairs, 2019, p. 8). The plan is aimed to prioritize projects that are going to be help in projecting cash availability and identify capital investments that will help preserve buildings on campus (Division of Student Affairs, 2019, p. 8). Over time, this plan is projected to improve student fee processes and help "institutional leaders preserve assets instead of hiring more personnel or funding additional programs" (Division of Student Affairs, 2019, p. 8).

 

10. Which questions could you not answer? Where could you try to find information that is not in the document?

· I had trouble answering question 8 as there were a few metrics that had apparent improvements for the department, whereas other data seemed to stand alone as new initiatives the department was trying to implement in order to keep on track with their mission and goals. The student affairs website would be my next source to elaborate on any information detailed in this report, or even visit the main homepage of OSU to see if any performance goals are described there.