This document provides an overview of a higher education student services learning community at the University of Missouri-St. Louis. It introduces the 10 cohort members and 3 mentors in the community and explains that the community is organized around selecting a client-based problem of practice for the cohort's dissertation. The community chose to partner with Crowder College to address their issue of high withdrawal rates in general education courses. The cohort will analyze factors contributing to poor performance and design student support interventions to improve retention. Their end product will be a group dissertation assessing initial interventions implemented at Crowder College before the cohort graduates.

1. Serious education. Serious value
University of Missouri–St. Louis
SELECTING A CLIENT-BASED PROBLEM
OF PRACTICE FOR A DISSERTATION IN
PRACTICE
Higher Education Student Services
Learning Community

2. Serious education. Serious value
DIRECTION FOR THE
PRESENTATION
 Introduction of Community Members and
Thematic Learning Community
 Development of RFP
 Decision-Making Process
 Future Goals
OVERVIEW

3. Serious education. Serious value

4. Serious education. Serious value
COMMUNITY MEMBERS
TEN COHORT MEMBERS AND THREE MENTORS
 Sean Chism, M.Ed.
 Joseph Grailer, M.F.A.
 Tyson Holder, Ed.S.
 Theresa Keuss, M.Ed.
 Earl Macam, M.S.Ed.
 Felicita Myers, M.Ed.
 Brittany Neunuebel, M.Ed.
 Natissia Small, M.Ed.
 Antoinette Sterling, M.A.
 Brian Tiemeier, M.A.
Mentor Team
 Shawn Woodhouse, Ph,D.
 Kimberly Allen, Ph.D.
 Kathleen Haywood, Ph.D.

5. Serious education. Serious value
THEMATIC LEARNING
COMMUNITIES
 Community is organized around a theme
 Members take the same courses together
 Build a knowledge base relevant to the theme
 Identify and address a high leverage problem of
practice
that becomes the Dissertation in Practice
THE SIGNATURE PEDAGOGY OF THE Ed.D. IN EDUCATIONAL PRACTICE

6. Serious education. Serious value
COMMUNITY MEETS CONTINUOUSLY
Year Fall Spring Summer
1 LC Seminar LC Seminar LC Seminar
2 LC Seminar LC Seminar Lab of Practice
3 DiP DiP DiP
FROM THE START OF THE PROGRAM TO THE FINISH

7. Serious education. Serious value
COMMON COURSES
Building Socially Just Educational
Communities
Ethical and Legal Issues in Educational
Practice
Evaluation of Educational Programs
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in
Educational Practice
COMMON COURSES TAKEN WITH OTHER THEMATIC LEARNING COMMUNITIES

8. Serious education. Serious value
COURSES TAKEN
Learning Community (LC) in Practice
 Focus on specific skills and topics related to LC
emphasis
 Used to develop Request for Problem in Practice
and review presentations
 Developed writing, communication, and research
skills
 Explore HESS positions and responsibilities
LEARNING COMMUNITY (LC) IN PRACTICE

9. Serious education. Serious value
COURSES TAKEN
Inquiry Courses for Educational Practitioners
 Survey Design
 Interviewing
 Designing Research
 Project Management
 Chosen by LCs to provide foundational skills
 We plan to take Data Analysis, Grant Writing,
Budgeting and Financial Issues
HESS-LC COHORT CLASSES

10. Serious education. Serious value
WHAT’S IN OUR SHOPPING CART?
COHORT COLLABORATION
 Thinking outside the box
 Entertaining and Innovative
 Chaotic but fun! Ingenuity at it’s
best
 No one particular person is an
expert
 Everyone has a valid opinion
 Messy, creative, daring, unafraid
to try something unconventional,
professional
 Not being afraid of failure
 Value of thinking outside the box

11. Serious education. Serious value
BUILDING ON OUR STRENGTHS AND
PERSONALITY
RESPONSIBILITY, CONNECTEDNESS, POSITIVITY, INTELLECTION, ARRANGER

12. Serious education. Serious value
DEVELOPMENT OF THE
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
 High Leverage Problem of Practice
 Significant Value
 Challenge the status quo
 Influence Several Facets of the Institution
 Require the Cooperation of Key Stakeholders
 Analysis and Evaluation Process
 Advocate for Change
 Support System Change
 Receptive to Implementation Strategies
(RFP) SELECTION PROCESS

13. Serious education. Serious value
DESIRED CHARACTERISTICS
Educational
 Allow for Numerous Options
 Analyze Variables on Several Levels
 Opportunity to Apply Concepts Learned
Assessment Experience
 More than Research and Recommend
 In-Depth Analysis
 Evaluate Outcomes

14. Serious education. Serious value
DESIRED CHARACTERISTICS
Leadership
 Multi-layered
 Chance for Each of Us to Manage and Lead
Collaboration Opportunities
 Within Cohort and Partnering Institution
 More than Supplying Information
 Invested in the Partnership and Proposed
Interventions

15. Serious education. Serious value
DESIRED CHARACTERISTICS
Positive Impact for Students and
Educators
 Scenarios Hoping to Avoid
 Regulatory
 Athletics
 Greek Life
 Residential Life
 Scenarios Desired
 High Impact for Significant Number of Students

16. Serious education. Serious value
PROBLEM AND SOLUTION
RFP Unique
 Requesting a Problem AND Proposing a
Partnership in Identifying Solutions
 Active on Both Sides of the Equation
(RFP) SELECTION PROCESS

17. Serious education. Serious value
COMPONENTS
 Division of Duties
 Timeline
 12-18 Month Engagement Period
 Initial Inquiry to Initial Implementation
 Budget
 Benefits Derived Outweigh the Investments
 Partner and Problem Characteristics
 Group Dynamics
 Reveal Previous Partnerships or Recommendations
 Result: Scenario that Fits the Bill of our Desired
Goal
(RFP) SELECTION PROCESS

18. Serious education. Serious value
DEVELOPMENT OF THE
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
Short Biographies for Each Cohort
Member
 Our Background and Breadth of Experience
Sought Professional Critique
 Versed in Formatting Proposals
 Gain Feedback and Guidance
 Assist with Effective Communication
Exercise in Teamwork
 Multiple Discussions
Final Document
(RFP) SELECTION PROCESS

19. Serious education. Serious value
(RFP) AREA
 RFP sent to colleges
and universities in the
region
 Cohort members identified
potential collaborators
 Within a 200 mile radius

20. Serious education. Serious value
PROPOSALS!
 3 Proposals were
received
 2 institutions were
invited to make a
presentation
 In-person
 Skype
RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS

21. Serious education. Serious value
UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI - ST. LOUIS
COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES
AND
COLLEGE OF FINE ARTS &
COMMUNICATION
 Office of Advising and Student Retention
 19 Departments and offer 30+ undergraduate degree
programs
 Committed to supporting the Strategic Plan of UMSL
 To increase the number of degrees conferred by 20% by
2018
 Seeking solutions to the large list of “Super Seniors”
 Students with 120+ credit hours
o Have not completed a degree
CAS/CoFAC

22. Serious education. Serious value
CAS/CoFAC
SUPER SENIORS
Student population for both colleges is
2,498
 1,981 in College of Arts and Sciences
 46% (915) CAS enrolled in Fall 2014
 517 in College of Fine Arts and Communication
 88% (455) CoFAC enrolled in Fall 2014
Students with 120+ attempted hours
(1,370)
Financial Aid
 Cannot graduate
SPRING 2014

23. Serious education. Serious value
CAS/CoFAC
SUPER SENIORS
 Advising loads of 600+ students
 Create graduation plans for each super senior
 Reach out to students to come in for academic planning
 Limited to a few weeks where they have schedules to
address this initiative
 Convert 10% of Super Seniors into Graduates within
two semesters
 Result in an additional 286 graduates between the 2 Colleges
 20% increase in degrees awarded for CAS/CoFAC in one year
ADVISOR ROLES

24. Serious education. Serious value
CAS/CoFAC
SUPER SENIORS
Role of HESS Cohort for this Problem of
Practice:
Identify creative strategies for reducing
the number of super seniors
STATED GOAL FOR HESS-LC

25. Serious education. Serious value
CROWDER COLLEGE
CROWDER COLLEGE
Skype Interview
Vice President of
Academic Affairs
Statistics about Crowder
Neosho, Mo
5,500 – 6,000 students
20 – 30% earn a degree
*1,000 students drop
out between fall and
spring every year!

26. Serious education. Serious value
In 2011, it was named as one of the “Great Colleges to Work For” by the
Chronicle of Higher Education.
Offers Associate of Arts, Associate of Science, Associate of Applied
Science degrees in addition to many Certificates.
Approximately 200 students live on campus.
45% are fulltime students.
Minority enrollment is 10% of the student body (majority Hispanic and
African American), which is less than the state average of 20%.
Crowder College is the only community college within Newton County, MO.
CROWDER COLLEGE

27. Serious education. Serious value
CROWDER COLLEGE
 Low Completion and Withdrawal Rates
 Job Opportunities
 Transfer to 4-year institution
 Experiment with a Major
 Unprepared/Underprepared for College Level Work
 D, F, and W grades in General Education Courses
 Multiple Developmental Classes
 Result
 Student Finances are depleted!
POSSIBLE REASONS

28. Serious education. Serious value
THE PROBLEM
What is the problem? What are they asking us to help
them with?
 Support Strategies for high
school students
 Increase student success in
general education
courseworkWithdrawal
Rate!

29. Serious education. Serious value
WHICH PROPOSAL?
CAS/CoFAC CROWDER COLLEGE
DECISIONS!
 Super Seniors
 Identify and Prioritize Super
Seniors in need of
Intervention
 Study progression patterns in
degrees with chronically high
percentage of Super Seniors
 Prevention strategies
 Advocate for academic
policies and processes
 High Withdrawal Rates
 Identify general education classes
that have the most D, F, and W
grades over the most recent three
years
 Identify students who have D, F,
and W grades in these classes
 Determine if there is a correlation
between performance in general
education classes and a number
of variables related to high school
experience and performance.

30. Serious education. Serious value
CAS/COFAC CONCEPT MAP
CAS/COFAC (UMSL)

31. Serious education. Serious value
PROPOSAL COMPARISON
CROWDER COLLEGE

32. Serious education. Serious value
DESCRIPTIONS
PROPOSAL EVALUATION RUBRIC
Quality Indicator Description
Very Good
9-10 points
The response is specific and comprehensive. There is complete, detailed, and clearly
articulated information as to how the criteria are met. The ideas presented are
innovative, well-conceived and thoroughly developed.
Good
6-8 points
The response is reasonably comprehensive and includes sufficient detail. It contains
many of the characteristics of a response that is very good even though it may
require additional specificity, support or elaboration in places.
Fair
3-5 points
The response is non-specific and lacks focus and detail. The response addresses
some of the selection criteria, but not all. Some ideas presented are sound, but others
are not responsive to the purpose of the RFP. Additional information is needed in
order to be reasonably comprehensive and meet the criteria of a response that is
good.
Poor 1-2
Points
The response does not meet many criteria; provides inaccurate information or
provides information that requires substantial clarification as to how the criteria are
met; lacks meaningful detail; demonstrates lack of preparation; or otherwise raises
substantial concerns about the applicant’s understanding of the issue in concept
and/or ability to meet the requirement in practice.
No Evidence
0 points
The response does not address the criteria or simply re-states the criteria.

33. Serious education. Serious value
SCORING GUIDE
Proposal
Component
Evaluation Factor Score Evaluator
Comments
Organizational Information Proposer provides
background information about
the institution and its current
program(s), uniqueness, etc.
The institution has the
capacity to undertake the
partnership.
Problem Description The problem has potential for
high leverage impact.
The problem is suitable for
engagement within a 12-18n
month timeline.
Collective Stakeholder Buy-
in
Stakeholders are defined.
Change will be supported by
the collective stakeholders.
There is a clear
understanding of allotted
resources.

34. Serious education. Serious value
ADDITIONAL PROPOSAL
COMPONENTS
 Collaborative Inquiry
 Inputs and Outcomes
 Evaluation
 Previous Solution
Attempts
 Sustainability
 Value and Cost

35. Serious education. Serious value
WHICH PROBLEM IN PRACTICE (PIP)
DID WE CHOOSE?
CROWDER COLLEGE!

36. Serious education. Serious value
WHY CROWDER COLLEGE?
 The difference between the two proposed
problems
 Proactive rather than reactive
 The focus is on causes rather than
symptoms

37. Serious education. Serious value
 Crowder Welcomed
Us!

38. Serious education. Serious value
 With such a diverse and experienced cohort, we feel confident of
combating this Problem in Practice (PIP)!
COHORT STRONG!

39. Serious education. Serious value
THE PROJECT
 Ten General Education classes with the highest percentage of
students earning a D, F, or W over the most recent 3 year period
of time
 Students receiving the D, F, or Ws will be identified
 High School transcripts of all enrollees will be reviewed along with
ACT and Compass scores
 Determine if there is a correlation between the performance in
General Education classes and a number of variables related to
high school experiences and performance
 Is there a correlation between the lack of enrollment during the
senior year of high school in a specified content class and
subsequent lack of success in the same content general
education class?
IDENTIFY FACTORS OF THE PROBLEM

40. Serious education. Serious value
LAYING THE GROUNDWORK
Fall Activities
 Skype with Crowder College
 Visit Crowder College
 Tour
 On-site data collection and
research
 Meet with key stakeholders
 Job Shadow
FIELD WORK ON CROWDER CAMPUS

41. Serious education. Serious value
LAYING THE GROUNDWORK
Problem in Practice
 Literature Review
 Concept Mapping
Spring Activities
 Laboratory of Practice
 Two LC project managers
appointed each semester
FIELD WORK ON CROWDER CAMPUS

42. Serious education. Serious value
WHAT IS THE END PRODUCT?
INTENT OF PROJECT
CROWDER COLLEGE
 Determine if there is a
correlation between the
performance in General
Education classes and a
number of variables related to
high school experiences and
performance
 Design student support
interventions
 Implement new strategies to
improve retention of students
 Continued Collaborative
relationship with UMSL
Learning Communities
HESS-LC COHORT
 Coordinate a systemic set of proposed
interventions
o High School – preparation
o Faculty – work with students in critical
areas
o Tutoring programs
 Group Dissertation
 Technical Report
 Multiple Reports
 Design and assess initial interventions
before graduation
 Opportunity to make a larger impact
because we have more Human Capital
 Reflective Student Affairs Practitioners
 Transition into Leadership roles

43. Serious education. Serious value
GRADUATION!
CELEBRATION!