San José State University - Home of the Spartans
One Washington Square - San José, California USA, 95192 -
408.924.1000
| SJSU Home : WASC Accreditation : WASC Portfolio : Supplemental Data : Synthesis of SE Data |
External context: The experience of SJSU students is clearly located in a particular demographic and political context. As a campus that draws primarily from the surrounding area, diversity is a hallmark: “This campus is so unique and rich with diversity!”, “I learned so much from being around people of differing backgrounds, interests, and ages”, “This school is very multicultural and is part of the real world”, and “San Jose State offers a well-rounded community of students of every ethnicity and religion that makes the college experience more educational” (link to a forthcoming appendix listing of diversity-related comments). Graduating seniors value “the culture and diversity that was represented on campus and incorporated into the classroom.” Alumni emphasized the educational value of exchanging ideas and interacting with diverse students, the importance of diverse ethnic role models, and the “rich global experience” of the campus.
Students see SJSU as an important participant in Bay Area higher education, noting articulation agreements with local community colleges, relationships with the other universities in the area, and a unique niche forged from decades of training the professionals in the region. Students also compare their experience at SJSU to what they know – or imagine – of other universities in the area and what they know – or imagine – others think of SJSU. For example, although 80% of the 2004 alumni survey respondents rated SJSU’s academic programs as good or excellent, only 56% rated the university’s reputation as highly. This context, and the range of comparisons, are evident in the things current students would like WASC to know, for example: “SJSU is in desperate need of visibility!”, “In the heart of Silicon Valley I would expect the college located here to have more technological resources for their students”, “We may not pay as much tuition as Stanford or Berkeley, but we’re getting the same education, if not a better education!” and “This school has hands-down the best cost-education ratio in this area, state, or even in the nation, in my opinion.”
State politics and the persistent budget crisis represent another hallmark of the external context of student experience of San Jose State University. The sentiments of many students and alumni can be summed up by the undergraduate who expressed “We need more money, classes, and teachers because we’re not getting enough of all three of those and it’s affecting every single one of us” (link to a forthcoming appendix listing of budget-related comments).
Mediated context: The data suggest that students are particularly
sensitive to the ways in which the impact of the broader external context is
mediated by the actions of individuals within the institution. They perceive
the university to be managed and administered by powerful decision-makers and
gatekeepers, holding administrators, frontline staff, departments, advisors,
faculty, even the football coach responsible for decisions and actions with
direct and immediate consequences on educational effectiveness.
Anger and frustration are evident in student and alumni indictments of parking policies, unfriendly and inefficient administrative offices, fee increases, cancelled classes, unprepared or inattentive faculty, and inconsistent communication across the university. In contrast, students and alumni cite the profound and positive impact of individual actions, noting mentoring professors, helpful advisors, diverse and productive study teams, challenging academic standards, well-respected departments, and motivated students. “This school is known for its diversification, highly involved teachers and students that are willing to strive that extra mile in accomplishing their dreams and aspirations.”
Immediate context: The most passionate comments about student experience come, not surprisingly, from the context of their own immediate life experience as it is shaped by the external context and affected by the mediating actions of powerful others. Indeed, 92% of the 811 alumni responding to the Fall 2004 Alumni Survey said that their experiences as students shape their current perceptions of SJSU, including their perceptions of its academic programs, reputation, and relations with the community. Students feel external threats to educational effectiveness in very personal ways. For example, “I hate the budget cuts. I can’t get all my classes next to each other, so I’m here all day, 4 days a week;” or “With so many classes cut, it’s impossible to get out of here in 5, even 6 years!” Some wanted WASC to know that “my department doesn’t have money to give students handouts” and “my department has a wonderful program but there are not enough classes or assistance for students”.
Throughout the period under review, students were adamant in their concerns over the daily impact of inadequate parking policies and facilities, describing 30 minute searches each day for available spaces, scheduling classes around parking rather than curriculum, routine parking garage hostility, and “demolition derby” competition for contested parking spots. They also experience very deeply the personal toll of repeated “administrative nightmares”, and the frustration that results from lack of coordination between administrative units or personnel.
Despite the challenges and frustrations, students are also very clear about the value of a college education. In the words of a continuing and then a graduating student: “SJSU is a great big place that is giving a great deal of opportunities unlike any other”, and “I will cherish my time here.”
Ten themes related to educational effectiveness emerged from the data, crosscutting each of the three contexts of student experience. The ten themes can be organized as the endpoints of five tensions, “pushes and pulls” that students experience during their time at San Jose State University. Some students are clearly located at one end of the tension, with reinforcing experiences and little movement away from an extreme and well-defined experience. These students tended to give three words to describe their experience at SJSU that were either all positive (“Stimulating, interesting, fulfilling”; “Good, liberating, awesome”; “intensive but rewarding”; “Enduring, Rewarding, Fun”; “It’s been great!”) (link to forthcoming positive words appendix) or all negative (“Expensive, Disorganized, Non-communication”; “Horrible, Horrible, Horrible”; “Irritating, Red tape, Underfunded”; “Frustrating, Disappointing, Unsupportive” “Incredibly unorganized university” ). (link to forthcoming all negative appendix). More common than the extreme positions, were dynamic expressions of the tensions (“Frustrating, Challenging, Fulfilling”; “Empowered, Exciting, Overwhelming”; “Stressful but Good”; “Busy, Wonderful, Draining”, “Confusing, Exciting, Enlightening”). (link to forthcoming appendix of mixed words). The data reveal tensions more than extremes, and indicate the power of context – particularly the mediated context – to transform tensions into either slippery slopes or dynamic dualities, both of which have significant impact on the students’ perception of educational effectiveness.
Convenience/Inconvenience
“A great place for students that is affordable and close to home”; “There is nowhere to park!”
Pride in SJSU’s history, reputation, and community involvement, and delight in finding that without having to relocate, were frequently cited as attracting students to the university. For graduate students in particular, the metropolitan university commitment to community engagement was often noted as a crucial element in their ability to obtain “real-world” experiences, including internships and other work experience, close to campus and close to home. Graduate students also value evening and night course offerings, comparing this to the more limited schedules of other local universities. Undergraduates expressed appreciation for the ability to seek higher education without having “to go away to school.” Both students and alumni expressed appreciation for opportunities to get involved with the diverse resources and communities in Silicon Valley. They also noted the convenience of the university’s location within the city of San Jose: “Everything I need is right here, all in downtown”, easy freeway access, and the safety of the campus (“It’s safe to walk here at night) and the city of San Jose (“One of the safest cities in the U.S.!”). Mostly likely reflecting the importance of convenience, the NSSE data show that while 21% of SJSU seniors would “definitely” attend SJSU if they could start over, 54% “probably” would. The 1999 graduating student survey found that 73% rated their overall SJSU experience as good-excellent and 80% of graduates would recommend SJSU to friends and siblings.
These conveniences, however, are tempered by students’ frustration with what they feel are unwarranted and burdensome inconveniences. Students and alumni cite a number of specific inconveniences, some of which are, ironically, exacerbated by the very elements students find so convenient. Parking is a prime example – a profoundly inconvenient aspect of a convenient local campus. In the words of a graduating senior on the 1999 exit survey “Parking is intolerable, maddening, and inexcusable….This creates intense frustration among students”. Students note with great agitation that the cost of parking is too high and that there is no guarantee of finding a space, even for paid permit holders. This is no small concern for students attending a commuter campus, often juggling tight work, family, traffic, and class schedules in long 18-hour days. While some students have sought individual solutions (e.g., light rail to campus, carpool, early morning classes when parking is more available), others emphasized what they perceive to be basic issues of fairness (e.g., a permit should guarantee a space, cost should be less for students than for faculty, etc.), or broader contextual factors (e.g., particularly poor public transportation in the greater Bay Area). Throughout the period under review, students have urged the administration to seek long-term solutions to this structural inconvenience, such as, “the president can ask the city to have more free street parking”, “build more parking garages”, and “offer subsidized apartments so students can live on or near campus.”
Another example of the convenience/inconvenience tension is evidenced in student comments about services and resources. Students who work full-time and take classes in the evenings cite frequent frustration with the availability – or lack of availability - of on-campus resources after 5:00 p.m. These students, who appreciate the convenience of night classes because they are not able to come to school during the day, are often unable to meet with advisors, attend faculty office hours, drop off papers in the department office, use campus computing facilities, or access the student health, counseling or career center services supported by their student fees. These frustrations are felt as personal problems at one level, but also seen as institutional irresponsibility: “If the university offers classes at a certain time, they should offer the necessary support services then, too.” One at a time, these inconveniences are annoying but cumulatively they create significant challenges for some of the very students who chose SJSU for its convenience. From their perspectives, the inconveniences built into our convenient university significantly impact their ability to get the most from their educational experience.
Individual Responsibility/Institutional Accountability
“If I wait for the door to open, it might never open”…
Students and alumni highlighted an array of institutional hurdles
they face at SJSU. The combined data clearly show that students understand they
must be proactive and vigilant in many aspects of university life, but they
fear this is because the institution too often falls short of meeting their
basic needs. While students respect the maturity that emerges from their struggles,
they fail to see the reason for the struggles in the first place. The vast majority
of these challenges center on their virtual and face-to-face interactions with
administrative offices related to admissions, records, and enrollment; general
student advising, and communication between administrative units of the university
(link to forthcoming appendix of these comments).
Over and over, between 1999 and 2004, the same stories emerged from student
accounts of their experience: conflicting information from advisors (“When
officials who did my graduation evaluation finally got my materials, I got completely
different requirements than I had been given by staff advisors”, “I
got different directions, different information, everywhere I went”),
misplaced petitions (“I had to carry it in myself five times!”),
lost applications (“The community college said to send in three or four
copies as SJSU is famous for losing things”), missing transcripts (“It
took me three years to get all my courses transferred in”). Students spoke
of being dropped from all their classes because of a minor mistake in payment;
being locked out of registration due to a PeopleSoft error; being unable to
get financial aid checks because of an error in the grading system, and countless
other examples of “being screwed over by the system”.
Undergraduates were particularly pointed in their expressions of confusion and frustration with the administrative offices and personnel. One senior recalled how, as a freshman, several of her friends wanted to leave immediately because of the lack of useful and available information. Students complain of “lack of compassion for students”, “lack of customer relations skills”, and administrative staff who “specialize in being rude”, leaving them wondering “Do you people really want me here?” and “Do they get pleasure from making us miserable?” Others complain about lack of coordination across administrative units “Nobody [student services] knows what they are doing and no one takes responsibility for it. No one beyond my department seems to even know where the bathroom is...it is so discouraging.” A 2004 graduating senior noted “The hoops one is made to go through (Person A sends you to Person B who tells you to call Person C) are unbearable.” While the SJSU NSSE data show that only 5-6% of participating SJSU first year and senior students report unpleasant relationships with faculty, 22-28% report unpleasant relationships with administrative personnel and offices, notably higher percentages than reported from the comparison samples.
Undergraduate students weren’t the only ones to experience
frustration with administrative systems; graduate students expressed concern
with a confusing, non-responsive, “unprofessional” administration:
“Admissions is unhelpful, rude, and expect you to know everything they
do;” “They always lose stuff. You cannot mail it; you have to submit
it in person” and “SJSU has provided me with many great teachers
and learning atmospheres, but I have been greatly dissatisfied with the administration
and system”. Students would like to see “more accountability for
Admissions and Records.” In sum, students perceive administrative processes
as interfering with, and not facilitating or supporting, instructional effectiveness.
It is important to note, however, that while confronting these hurdles, students
identify strategies for success. Indeed, they often cite these very challenges
as helping them to cultivate a sense of individual responsibility and action:
“I learned to WANT an education and I just took over responsibility for
myself.” Many students note that the PeopleSoft system, irrespective of
its developmental problems, helps them take greater control of monitoring degree
requirements and progress. Other students respond to the challenges by becoming
more involved in their degree programs; by seeking regular major advising, students
are better aware of their specific requirements. Many students identify being
proactive as most central to their success at SJSU. They advise other students
to choose a meaningful major, get to know department chairs and advisors (“Connect.
Connect with your professors and do it early.”), and identify and make
use of campus resources (i.e., orientation, department websites, Student Health,
counseling, tutoring centers, and professors). Students note that attending
SJSU has taught them “to grow up.” As one student notes, “It
helps me learn to make my own opportunities. If I wait for the door to open,
it might never open.”
Perhaps because the satisfaction of self-reliance is no longer a new experience, graduate students expressed more frustration than accommodation along this tension, and more frequently extended their concerns about accountability to faculty. Graduate students in numerous programs were concerned over the perceived high turnover of faculty, and the practice of substituting less qualified instructors, in some cases other graduate students, in place of tenure-track or tenured professors. One frustrated student noted that it sometimes seemed that the university “pulled people off the street and asked, ‘can you teach this?’”
Many seniors and graduate students expressed concern over perceived low academic standards “They accept anybody”, “Don’t give away A’s; too many students coast”, “It cheapens everyone’s degree when some make it out without really working.” This tension between individual responsibility and institutional accountability is felt in acutely personal ways, influenced by both the external and mediating contexts of student experience, and impacting student’s assessment of our educational effectiveness and integrity.
Opportunity/Inaccessibility
”We have such a beautiful new library – I would really like to see it filled with better resources”…
Students and alumni expressed great appreciation for the opportunities provided by an affordable local university with strong academic programs. In the face of what they perceive to be poorly explained and institutionally promoted fee increases, many students indicated that financial aid packages and scholarships keep the opportunity for higher education from becoming inaccessible, but just barely. They also expressed other aspects of the tension between opportunity and inaccessibility. While students and alumni note the many opportunities at SJSU, many feel that students don’t have access to some of the basics one would expect of a contemporary university, don’t really know what is available to them, or don’t feel fully part of a campus community.
Students and alumni readily cite numerous opportunities enjoyed by SJSU students, among these the cultural diversity of the campus community, leadership opportunities, the award-winning campus library, the wide range of physical activity classes, campus laptop initiatives and wireless access, supportive student colleagues, free light rail passes, free gym access, free condoms and health education seminars, the campus radio station, the student store, the Event Center, the day care center, and “enthusiastic” and effective professors, to name just a few. Over and over, students cite opportunities to get to know faculty, to engage in “real world” projects, to participate in research even as undergraduates, and to pursue individual career goals.
Factor analysis of the classroom survey data pointed to several inter-related opportunities associated with instruction that students appreciate in their SJSU experience. Students were particularly pleased with library resources (77.2% rated this item good or excellent – undergraduates more so than graduate students), classroom instruction (65%), and class size conducive to learning (59% rated this excellent or good – graduates more so than undergraduates). In response to the open-ended question of what was most valuable to their education at SJSU, alumni noted “classes” most frequently. NSSE data show that 46% of SJSU first year students and 60% of SJSU seniors report that they often or very often have “worked harder than [they] thought they could to meet an instructor’s standards or expectations.”
Diversity emerged again as a central value of the SJSU experience, often tempered by other variables such as affect, size, and opportunities to connect with other people. Students and alumni stated that exposure to diversity helps them understand and appreciate different cultures, communicate more effectively across difference, and discern multiple sides to an issue. The NSSE data show a definite increase in the percentage of responding SJSU first year students (41%) and SJSU seniors (65%) who report that they often or very often work with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments. Students noted the opportunities provided by diverse peers, welcoming faculty, and smaller classes, but were concerned about steadily growing class sizes, noting that “student-teacher relationships [can not] be formed when the student is just a number.” Graduate students specifically noted that it is important to have supportive peers—“students who have high standards…[a] competitive nature but nurturing spirit at the same time.”
Both graduate and undergraduate students heralded campus instruction, especially as it engages students as diverse individuals. One student summarized, “faculty are approachable and available outside of class; education and student success are their priorities” and yet another noted “faculty help you to make it in the outside world”. Students call on the university to work toward finding and retaining qualified and motivated faculty who represent diversity, excellence in their fields, and enthusiasm for their work.
Despite the abundance of opportunities they recognize, students are frustrated with what they perceived as the lack of resources, particularly in a university located in the heart of Silicon Valley. Half of the student survey respondents (48%) rated technology resources as only fair or poor. Students are frustrated by “old computers”, limited workstations in the computer labs, and inadequate lab hours. They note the lack of access to technology in classrooms, in majors, and in public spaces. Many appreciate the wireless laptop initiative, but also complain that few classrooms are appropriately “smart” and that even fewer have adequate projectors or instructional equipment. Students express frustration with the lack of “cutting edge” software and other analytical tools, concerned that they are lagging behind what is being used in business and industry. Students, particularly graduate students, were proud of the new library, but frustrated with the limited collections: “The library is great and beautiful, but the books are so outdated! I can never find anything more current than 1995.”, “We have such a beautiful new library – I would really like to see it filled with more recent resources”. Concerns about the buildings (old, no air conditioning, poor lighting), the desks (uncomfortable, old, vulgar graffiti carved on the desktops), and elevators (scary, break down too often) were also frequent.
Another dimension of the opportunity/inaccessibility tension is reflected in students’ concerns that they don’t know what is available. Graduate students, in particular, noted a frustration with the campus website, stating that it contains too little information, is difficult to navigate, and lacks proper forms and consistent instructions. Other students were concerned that they learned of resources or activities too late. In the words of a graduating senior: “I just started using the pool this semester - I wish they had told me about it earlier”, or an undergraduate who said “I wish I’d known more about opportunities to get involved in student activities and organizations.” Alumni data support this experience: 76% of respondents had never participated in the university’s cross-cultural programming, 57% had not used Counseling Services, and 35% had not accessed the Career Center while students.
Time and outside obligations often make opportunities inaccessible. The NSSE data provide a revealing comparison of SJSU students to the full NSSE sample and to participating American Democracy Project (ADP) universities. Nearly ¾ (74%) of SJSU first year respondents report spending no time at all in co-curricular activities, compared to 45% of the ADP sample and 38% of the all NSSE first year students. Only slight progress is made by the senior year: 69% of SJSU participating seniors still report no co-curricular activities, compared to 51% and 44% from the comparison groups. Reflecting back on what they would do differently or advice they would give to others, many SJSU graduating seniors and alumni urge students to “find out all the campus has to offer”, “ask questions, be persistent”, “get involved in campus life”, “join professional organizations”, “get to know your classmates”, and “get involved in clubs and societies early.”
And finally, while students respect the institution as it treats them as individuals and realize that their own obligations limit their own ability to get involved, many lament what they perceive as a lack of campus community and school spirit: “The environment is friendly but students do not put out enough effort to make [it] a tightly knit community.” Some link it back to the mediated context of the university: “People in admissions were so unfriendly [when we transferred]. It freaked us out that they didn’t care.” Some compare SJSU student life to other places: “Other campuses are so happening. The only thing we have here is sales people trying to sell us something.” Whatever the reason, many students yearn for a different campus climate: “I didn’t get a sense of community. I kind of feel I missed the “college experience.’”
A sense of wistful regret was found in both the 1999 exit surveys and 2004 classroom discussions. This internal tension between the idealized or hypothetical campus experience contrasts with the practical reasons for choosing San Jose State because of work, location, or family concerns. Students and alumni often wish they had a more “complete” experience, but their own life circumstances put the idealized college experience out of the range of the practical or possible. This often poignant tension may persist without resolution, as a more accessible campus social life, better announcement of activities and opportunities, and friendlier staff still may not be able to alter the life circumstances that would make the idealized experience possible.
The greatest sense of community was located in departments and majors, with students often noting a sense of belonging or community, “with good friends and adults [faculty] who care about you”. “In my department, everyone is your friend. There is a real feeling of family and unity…You walk down the hall and you know everybody…It’s your safe zone.” The desire for greater engagement with campus activities and other students was a major theme for graduate students, who viewed collaborative experiences with other students and the general feeling of having a cohort as highly positive, but less common than it could be.
Persistence and Change
“It has history behind it, it has tradition”; “SJSU is like a forecast of the future of our country”…
Students experience San Jose State University as a place of both persistence and change, and perceive this tension as both challenging and rewarding. Many students appreciate the historical significance of the university. They describe it as “old and established”, a “real” college”, “one of the first colleges in California, it has history behind it, it has tradition.” Graduate and undergraduate students enjoy SJSU’s longstanding reputation for community involvement (“a real world setting, not a college town”). Students see the university as a “networking” institution that “has always reached out to the community to provide opportunities for students.” They experience SJSU as constant and reliable, in a good way.
But there is also a feeling that “things don’t change.” Whether referring to the administrative hassles (“I kept slipping through the cracks - over and over again and over again”), or the status quo (“rude and uneducated staff…and how long it has been without things getting better”), or the sense that the university “always seems to be playing catch-up”, the perception of persistent problems without improvement (parking, poor equipment, lack of access to services in the evenings, poor reputation with community college advisors) can lead students to feel “disappointed, discouraged, frustrated”.
And yet, change occurs. Students at the 2004 forums felt that new student advising is better than before. Some issues that emerged in the 1999 exit surveys have changed dramatically. For example, 1999 complaints about the old library and concerns about the proposed joint library project have given way to praise for the new facility, although many are still concerned about the quality of the research collections, particularly in specialized fields. The online application process, still a fairly recent development, receives highly favorable responses from students and alumni.
Positive changes in the campus environment were noted by students and alumni, and are evident when the 1999 exit data are compared to the responses of 2004 graduating seniors. Previous complaints about constant noise and disruption from construction projects have largely disappeared, and many current students mentioned excitement about the nearly completed Campus Village. In 1999, students complained that “the appearance of buildings needs dramatic upgrading”, but in 2004 students appreciate the grounds, as noted by a graduating senior who said, “The campus is beautiful to walk through”. Five years ago, students were very concerned with the safety of the campus and the parking garage, particularly at night; today, they mention safety as an asset of the university. Although many of these changes occur over time and beyond the scope of individual student experience, there is a shared sense that SJSU’s challenges and context have greater significance: “It’s like a forecast of the future of our country.”
Struggle/Liberation
”Same person, different soul”…
A final theme emerging from the accounts of student experience of San Jose State University is the tension between significant and daily struggles and liberation from old constraints. Students often spoke of the daily stress and the personal, financial, bureaucratic, or other struggles they experience in pursuit of higher education. Examples abound in the three words students offer to describe their experience of SJSU: “can’t obtain articles”, “total self reliance”, and “frustration, do it yourself”. They also emerge in students’ advice for future students: “Your grades are up to you, so don’t let parking, administration, or personal issues affect you getting to school,” and the one thing they want the WASC Team to know: “Students shouldn’t have to suffer because of the budget.”
Yet, the combined data also reveal a profound sense of transformation, “[SJSU] opened my eyes to who I want to be”. Some of this transformation is rooted in the generic experience of higher education, and reflected in other sets of three words: “great maturing process”, “positive, enriching, knowledge”, and “informative, educational, enlightening”. Students frequently identified faculty as key to their liberating experience (link to forthcoming appendix on faculty): “Professors make you want to learn about your role in the world, not just subject material” and “that my teachers seemed to really care about how their students were doing turned my life around.”
Some students credit the campus community: “This is definitely not a conservative environment. I’m so glad I came here because I broke out of what I had known previously.” Students note important life changes because of their college experience, such as “I stopped drinking so much”, “now I can talk to anyone, I’m more comfortable talking with older people”, “I’m better at teamwork”, “better at handling change”, “a better communicator and leader”, “better able to handle stress,” and “prepared for the difficult challenges of life.” Some of the ability to act in new ways is rooted in the very things that make SJSU so challenging for students: “I learned how to advocate for myself and others”, and some is forged in what they find quintessentially SJSU: “[my experience] raised my consciousness”, “If I hadn’t gone to SJSU, I would be still waitressing and miserable”….”less open to differences”…”still working dead-end jobs”…”less knowledgeable and aware.” And for some, the change is profound: “Same person, different soul.
|
San José State University - Home of the Spartans |
|