Current Release: September 11th, 2007 | Vol. XXIV Iss. 10

Where have all the students gone?

By Heather templeton

hntempleton@vwc.edu

After three full days of discussion and meetings, Noel-Levitz consultants and the Virginia Wesleyan Student Leadership Team have developed a plan featuring five “areas for action” to improve the quality of student life and learning on campus.

The “five areas of action” are an early alert system, curriculum logistics, more engaged learning, quality service and residence life quality.

“I think this is going to make campus ten times better,” said sophomore Tim Maloney. “Its going to bring attention to areas that are lacking and issues that have been overlooked.”

Noel-Levitz’s senior associate consultant Charles Schroeder promised an auditorium of students April 6 that the team is working towards developing service to students that is “fast, friendly, effective, and - God forbid - flexible.”

Schroeder and the leadership team, consisting of Dean of Students David Buckingham and Dr. Keith Moore, along with other faculty and staff, analyzed both quantitative and qualitative data to find which areas of campus needed the most improvement.

Virginia Wesleyan has entered into a four-year-plan with Noel-Levitz to improve the school in the areas of admissions, marketing, financial aid and student success.

“This is an incredible opportunity for the college to address issues of concerns and make VWC a better place for students,” said Moore.

Moore explained that this is another step in the process of helping Virginia Wesleyan reach Phi Beta Kappa caliber by the end of the decade.

“Retention and overall student success is the focus,” Moore said. “Success and satisfaction will equal retention. The solution is to find areas for improvement and fill the gap of where we are now and where we want to be.”

Currently VWC has a 71.5 percent retention rate and there is a 84 percent rate of those who are involved on campus. Schroeder and his team hope that through their plans they can get those numbers up.

“There is a direct relationship between satisfaction and success to committed alumni,” said Schroeder. “Satisfaction and involvement are linked.”

Through student success and satisfaction the retention rate will increase, he said.

Schroeder is working closely with the school to be sure the plans are implemented. His areas of expertise include student retention, satisfaction assessment and the quality of student life and learning. His review of the campus was split into qualitative and quantitative information gathering.

During March, Schroeder spent two days gathering “qualitative” information about the campus. He met with 64 students in small groups consisting of minorities, student leaders, students who were not doing well in classes, and students who were excelling. He also reviewed 12 back issues of the Marlin Chronicle and analyzed data trends from several campus offices.

The whole campus was then given a student satisfaction inventory (SSI), which 441 students completed. Out of those who completed the survey, 96 percent were traditional students, 68 percent were female, 32 percent male, and 62 percent worked a part-time job either on or off campus.

Schroeder invited the campus to a meeting Sunday to discuss the results of the SSI. The Blocker auditorium filled with approximately 100 students, ranging from athletes, Greeks, student government senators, club presidents and resident advisers.

Both Buckingham and Moore were pleased with the student turnout.

“It’s important for everyone to understand they have a part in this, especially students,” said Moore.

Students were given the opportunity to voice both their concerns and praises about the campus.

The main concerns addressed by students included financial aid processes and policies, understanding the bill, parking, vandalism, limited class availability, operating hours, housing, poor communication between offices, registration and residence hall maintenance.

President of Phi Kappa Tau Terry Heinze later said that he was concerned that other issues did not come up. He hoped that they would have discussed problems such as traffic back-ups on Wesleyan Drive every afternoon.

Strengths of the campus were friendliness, small class sizes, campus involvement, one-on-one attention and quality of faculty, aesthetically pleasing appearance, career services, the Learning Resourse Center, location, and a good balance between athletes and students.

Schroeder and Buckingham both intently listened to the student’s concerns and praises. Information from the original gathering, the SSI and the open meeting of students would all be taken into consideration while developing plans.

“It was a wonderful opportunity to give students voice,” said Heinze, “I especially loved how the Dean sat back and took it all in.”

Schroeder said he would be using all the information to form a “student-friendly judgment” for a strategy to start implementing programs for change. He promised students they could start seeing progress as early as August. He had four key promises for the students.

He promised to develop goals, strategies and action plans; create new programs to substantially improve current ones; implement major changes in August; and constantly monitor progress and engage students frequently to receive feedback and suggestions.

President of Kappa Alpha Nicholas Crisp said that he felt that Schroeder made several big promises that may be hard to follow through. He is unsure of what changes, if any, will be made.

Freshman J.C. Caldwell is more optimistic but still has concerns.

“I think it’s overall a good idea and should be done,” said Caldwell. “But, they could be setting up for too much. We’re never going to be perfect.”

The Student Leadership Team has linked with Schroeder and the Noel-Levitz team to implement the “five areas of action” and work towards keeping the promises that Schroeder made to the students.

Schroeder will be returning to campus on May 20 to assess the team and their progress up to that point.