Academic Program Life Cycles: An Application of a Dynamic Growth Model

SATURDAY MAY 21, 2011
\n
\n1.\tEarly Arrivers Reception (Special Event) 5:30-7:30pm –(Attended & Participated)
\nHighlights: at Waterfall Garden, Toronto Downtown sponsored by Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA, and afterwards organized into dinner groups for a tour of Toronto Downtown to experience a flavour of the City’s night life.
\n
\nSUNDAY MAY 22, 2011 
\n
\n2.\tFocus Group meeting 1:00-1:45pm(Attended and Participated):
\nHighlights: Planning Group met to finalize arrangement for collecting information about the Forum and getting attendees to participate in the Focus Group sessions to evaluate the Forum
\n
\n3.\tOpen Session with Miriam Carver at Conference B Hall 2:00-3:00pm: Information session on institutional research professional development opportunities. Attended and participated.
\n
\n
\n4.\tNewcomers Reception and Mentor/Mentee Gathering, City Hall, Sponsored by Inclusive Analytics. 3:30 – 4:15pm (Attended)
\nHighlights: This reception provided an opportunity for AIR newcomers to meet the Newcomers Committee and AIR Board as well as socializing and networking.
\n
\n5.\t Plenary Session 4:30 – 6:00pm Undergraduate Learning and Post-College Outcomes: Findings from the CLA Longitudinal Project, Grand Ball Room presented by Dr. Richard Arum Sponsored by SAS (Attended)
\n
\n6.\tForum Opening Reception Sheraton Hall Sponsored by Digital Measures Inc. 6:00 –7:30pm (Attended)
\n
\nMONDAY May 23, 2011
\n
\n7.\tSpecial Interest Group: 7:30-8:15am: Canadian Institutional Research & Planning Association (CIRPA) at York Room (Attended and Participated)
\nHighlights: Introduction of CIRPA members present with current institutional research focus and activities at Canadian institutions. Discussion of the next CIRPA Conference at Halifax, NS, and invitation for volunteers
\n
\n8.\tPanel Session: Creating Ongoing Communication and Collaboration Between Institutional Research Personnel and Faculty to Foster an Environment for Program Improvement: 8:30 -9:30am (Attended)
\nHighlights: The session discussed the communication and collaboration that occur between the Institutional Research Department and Departmental Faculties in an effort to gather and analyze data and then use the data to evaluate and improve programs.
\n
\n9.\tPresentation: Foundations of Excellence: A Self-Study and Planning Process that Yields Improved Retention 9:45 – 10:25am: (Attended)
\nHighlights: The study examined the self-study and planning process for the first college year at a large US university. It provided information about the process and its outcome for institutional participants.
\n
\n10.\tPresentation: A Not-Too-Difficult Way to Study Classroom Space Utilization- 11:00–11:40noon (Attended).
\nHighlights: The session reviewed the motivation and research design for a classroom utilization study at a US community college. The results allowed college administrators to better understand how well the college classroom space was being used by the academic departments.
\n
\n11.\tPresentation: An Examination of Master’s Degree Student Retention and Completion 11:55 – 12:35pm (Attended)
\nHighlights: The session discussed the factors which are likely to predict the retention and graduation of Master’s degree students in the context of doctoral degree enrolments using a logistic regression.
\n
\n12.\tPresentation: Is More Always Better? A Consideration of Response Rates and Bias in Higher Education Surveys 12:50 – 1:30pm (Attended)
\nHighlights: The study explored survey response bias through a review of the literature and examples from the presenter’s own experience conducting a survey of higher education faculty at institutions throughout the US. 
\n
\n13.\tPresentation: Predictors of Faculty Research Productivity: A Literature Review 1:45 – 2:25pm (Attended)
\nHighlights: The session reviewed faculty research productivity studies, models, and predictors. A university’s productivity is measured by the performance of its faculty and one measure of faculty performance is its research productivity. Faculty research productivity is variable and the session presented two set of factors that could predict this variance. 
\n
\n
\n14.\tPresentation: Integrated Campus Planning: Using Cross-Institutional Collaboration to Promote the Alignment of Strategic Directions. 3:00-3:40pm (Attended)
\nHighlights: The session explored integrated campus planning from an institutional research and organizational development perspective. Results are shared from a survey of colleges and universities across America concerning implementation of campus planning and IR’s roles.
\n
\n15.\tPresentation: New Roles for Institutional Research: Planning and Resource Utilization Support in the Emerging Economy. 3:55-4:35pm (Attended).
\nHighlights: The session presented new perspectives on the roles and functions of the Institutional Research office, which include planning and institutional resource allocation in support of achieving critical institutional goals such as enrollment management. 
\n
\n
\nTUESDAY MAY 24, 2011
\n
\n16.\tAIR A Plenary Session: Take Centre Stage: The Role of Institutional Research in Helping More Students Succeed. 8:00 – 9:30am (Attended)
\nHighlights: The session examined the challenges surrounding the completion of credentials past high school which present opportunities requiring to be taken advantage. Proposals for taking advantage of these opportunities include innovative technologies, creative student supports, dynamic delivery models, cross-sector partnerships, and data-informed policies.
\n
\n17.\tPresentation: analyzing Your Financial Health: A Model for Applying Long-Range Planning Scenarios. 9:45 – 10:25am (Attended)
\nHighlights: The session demonstrated the use of a strategic panning model for developing long-range planning for decision making by connecting enrollment, human resources, and budgetary assumptions of trends. The sample project used a combination of a pilot study, cross-unit collaboration, and training.
\n
\n18.\tScholarly Paper: Measuring Persistence Versus Retention Among Non-Traditional Students. 11:00 – 11:40am (Attended)
\nHighlights: The study illustrated how institutions that serve non-traditional students who do not enroll continuously through graduation can measure persistence versus retention. While retention is the common measure of student progress, persistence may be the more appropriate measure for students who stop out and re-enroll prior to graduation. 
\n
\n19.\tPresentation: Establishing An Academic Program Review to Ensure Viable Academic Programs. 11:55am – 12:35pm (Attended)
\nHighlights: The session explained how a viable academic review was developed and who was involved at a large university in the US. It explained a six factor categories that ensures a comprehensive program review. 
\n
\n20.\tTechnology: Monitoring the University’s Strategic Plan and Integrating Assessment Activities Using Task-Stream: One University’s Experience. 12:50 – 1:30pm (Attended)
\nHighlights: The session discussed the reasons for purchasing and installing the Task-Stream soft-ware for purposes of monitoring the goals and objectives set forth in the strategic plan. The session addresses the successes and challenges of adopting the soft-ware. 
\n
\n21.\tTargeted Affinity Group: Dynamic Parameters of Educational Opportunity: Demographics, Labour Markets, and Globalization. 2:00 – 3:00pm (Attended) 
\nHighlights: The session discussed opportunity in higher education in terms of access, choice, persistence, and attainment. While access looks good, choice, persistence, and attainment tend to look bad. Past educational policies have ignored the new demographics, changing labour market requirements for skilled labour, and globalization. The failure to create policy in the context of these realities has produced predictable and consequential results. 
\n
\n22.\tPresentation: Evaluation of Institutional Financial Aid Policies 3:15 – 3:55pm (Attended)
\nHighlights: The session presented the effects of institutional financial aid policies on several outcomes such as stop-out behaviour, drop-out behaviour, academic performance, and financial returns for the institution in which the policy is embedded. The session shed lights for university administrators on how to reduce stop-outs and drop-outs and increase academic achievements. 
\n
\n23.\tPresentation: Exploring the Utility of an Engagement-Based Student Typology in Studying College Outcomes 4:10-4:50pm (Attended)
\nHighlights: Using data of the 2006 cohorts, the session presented a student typology based on student responses to survey items in the NSSE and then examined the utility of this typology in understanding learning outcomes, self-reported gains, GPAs, and persistence from the first to second year.
\n
\nWEDNESDAY MAY 25, 2011 
\n
\n24.\tResearch In Motion: Becoming a Published Author: Options, Requirements, and Strategies 8:30 – 9:30am (Attended)
\nHighlights: This session provided an overview of AIR publications, the emphasis and desired submission format for each publication, and the review and selection process used by each. The panelists shared suggestions about preparing to be submitted for consideration. (I met the Editor for the publication of my Chicago paper as a Professional File monogram). 
\n
\n25.\tTECHNOLOGY: Creating a Dashboard for Institutional Strategic Planning and Effectiveness. 9:45– 10:25am (Attended)
\nHighlights: In a climate of high demand for information, it is critical to provide leadership with a vast array of data at their fingertips. Researchers from Missouri State University present the

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.