The office of Institutional Research and Planning supports the University in planning, goal-setting, assessment, institutional research and reporting, and student success initiatives.
We provide data to both internal and external constituents in order to meet federal and state reporting requirements, support accreditation, measure student learning outcomes, inform curricular development, and guide strategic initiatives.
We encourage our faculty and staff to contact us for specific data needs and to click below for additional resources and information.
We also offer our Research Roundtable, a monthly journal club for exploring literature on higher education practices and enhancing data literacy, every first Wednesday for all staff and faculty.
Assessment
View resources and data related to assessing our academic programs, including our liberal arts and sciences curriculum. Learn about our expected student learning outcomes.
Institutional Data
View university data according to various institutional, state and federal metrics.
All requests for data and reports should be directed to Campus Reporting.
Planning
Our office informs and measures planning initiatives. Please visit our Strategic Planning page for more information.
Research Roundtable
A monthly journal club for exploring literature on higher education practices and enhancing data literacy, every first Wednesday for all staff and faculty
Upcoming Meetings:
- Wed. March 5, 2025 in SCI 314
- Wed. April 2, 2025 in SCI 314
We want to stress that this journal club is open to all, regardless of your level of experience with reading or interpreting scientific papers. Whether you’re a seasoned researcher or new to academic literature, your perspective is welcome and valued. While we encourage participants to read the full paper, the minimum recommendation is to review the abstract.
Please feel free to suggest articles or topics you'd like to explore in future sessions. If you’re interested in joining or have any questions, kindly email Becca at rbuonoco@fitchburgstate.edu. Drop-ins will always be welcome!
[TBD] Predictors and consequences of math course repetition: The role of horizontal and vertical repetition in success among community college transfer students
Summary: Bicak et al. (2023) examines how repeating math courses affects academic outcomes for community college transfer students. The authors distinguish between horizontal repetition (retaking a different introductory math course after passing one) and vertical repetition (retaking the same course after passing it). Their analysis reveals that both types of repetition are associated with negative academic consequences, including lower cumulative GPAs, increased time to degree completion, and accumulation of excess credits. Notably, vertical repetition is also linked to a decreased likelihood of earning a bachelor's degree. The study emphasizes the importance of understanding the impacts of course sequencing in transfer pathways to develop interventions that support transfer student success.
April 2, 2025 Session: - How first-year academic momentum influences transfer outcomes among different racial and ethnic groups
Summary: Yu et al. (2024) investigates how first-year academic success (momentum) influences later academic success and graduation rates (outcomes) of transfer students, exploring disparities among different racial and ethnic groups. Using data from a large, diverse community college system, the study finds that early academic momentum—measured by factors such as GPA, credits attempted, and summer enrollment—strongly predicts transfer success. However, the researchers also found that these predictors of success operate differently across racial groups, suggesting that the impact of early academic momentum is not uniform. This highlights the need for targeted interventions to address and close equity gaps in higher education and ensure that all transfer students, regardless of their racial or ethnic background, have the support they need to succeed.
March 5, 2025 Session: Student engagement, school involvement, and transfer student success
Synopsis: Turnquest et al. (2024) examines the impact of student engagement and school involvement on the academic success of transfer students in higher education. The authors argue that these factors are crucial for transfer student success, finding that higher levels of both engagement (in studies) and involvement (in campus life) are associated with improved academic outcomes. Their research indicates that transfer students who are more engaged are more likely to have higher GPAs and graduate on time, while those more involved in campus life feel a greater sense of belonging and demonstrate increased persistence rates. Collectively, these findings suggest that fostering an engaging and inclusive environment is crucial for supporting transfer students' success in higher education.
No February paper/meeting
Jan. 2025 Session: Essay content and style are strongly related to household income and SAT scores: Evidence from 60,000 undergraduate applications
Alvero et al. (2021) investigates how application essays reflect socioeconomic disparities. Using data from 60,000 applicants, the study found essay content and style were more strongly associated with household income than SAT scores, highlighting encoded socioeconomic markers in qualitative admissions components. The findings stress the importance of revisiting holistic admissions practices amid trends to de-emphasize standardized tests.
Dec. 2024 Session: Choosing to learn: The importance of student autonomy in higher education
Cullen and Oppenheimer (2024) explores the role of autonomy-supportive policies in improving student engagement and learning outcomes. Using a randomized controlled field study, the authors found that giving students the choice to mandate their attendance increased their commitment and attendance rates. Similarly, allowing students to opt out of demanding assessments led to greater effort and mastery, highlighting the effectiveness of autonomy in enhancing motivation and academic performance.
Nov. 2024 Session: A customized belonging intervention improves retention of socially disadvantaged students at a broad-access university
Murphy et al. (2020) evaluates the impact of a customized social-belonging intervention at a broad-access university. It found that such interventions significantly increased retention rates among socially disadvantaged students by addressing belonging-related challenges, ultimately improving persistence and academic outcomes over two years. This study demonstrates the potential for scalable, context-specific interventions to enhance educational equity in diverse institutional settings.
How to read a scientific paper:
- Start with the abstract to get a high-level overview of the study's purpose, methods, key findings, and implications. This is a good time to check-in with guiding questions (see below) to frame your thoughts while reading.
- Skim the discussion and conclusion sections for interpretation of the findings and their implications. Readers with limited time are encouraged to read the abstract and conclusion sections at minimum to be able to engage meaningfully in discussion.
- Review key figures and tables by skimming through visuals and captions to understand the main data points.
- Readers with the time and space for deeper investigation of the paper should now visit the methods section to understand the study design and analytic approaches.
Guiding questions:
For all readers
- What is the main research question?
- What are the key findings?
- Why does this matter in the context of higher education?
- How does this study relate to our institution’s goals or challenges?
For deeper thinking
- What insights stood out to you, and why?
- Which figures or tables, if any, best supported the paper's objective(s)?
- Did anything in the paper surprise you or challenge your assumptions?
- What would you like to see explored in future research on this topic?
For deepest thinking
- How (through what methods) did the authors answer their research questions?
- Are the methods robust and ethical?
- What patterns or significant trends emerge in the results besides the main finding?
- What questions does this paper leave unanswered?