>From ctg@vt.edu Wed Oct 16 08:22:24 1996 Received: (from mailadm@localhost) by sable.cc.vt.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA12001 for fox@fox.cs.vt.edu; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 08:22:24 -0400 Received: from [128.173.119.106] (ctg.dos.vt.edu [128.173.119.106]) by sable.cc.vt.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA06080 for ; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 08:22:10 -0400 X-Sender: ctg@mail.vt.edu Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 08:23:17 -0500 To: fox@vt.edu From: ctg@vt.edu (Cathryn T. Goree) Subject: notes from last meeting Here are the expanded notes I promised you from my presentation last week. Sorry it took so long. Cathy The Virginia Tech student body is very different from that of comparable institutions. Overall it is a much more TRADITIONAL student body (demographically and psychosocially) than even those at very similar institutions. =85 Tech students are young. 56% of students on the Blacksburg campus are under 21, and 11 are 16 or younger this year. =85 Tech students are more politically and socially conservative than their peers nationwide. =85 A high percentage of undergraduates are housed on-campus in residence halls (about 38% at Tech compared to about 25% at most institutions which call themselves residential). =85 More Tech undergraduate students are enrolled full-time than at similar institutions. Virginia Tech is the only institution in the following list with a higher FTE than headcount. Virginia Tech students ON AVERAGE are taking more than a full load, and there are very few part-time undergraduates here. By contrast, all other institutions in the following list have far more part-time students. (Part of the difference in this table is definitional, but the difference is also real.) Institution 1995-96 Headcount 1995-96 FTE Virginia Tech 19,496 19,751.5 University of Houston 23,723 16,672 Univ. of Texas - Austin 35,086 29,588 Univ. of Tenn. - Knoxville 18,735 16,417 USC - Columbia 15,792 14,157 Clemson 12,331 11,861 Oklahoma State Univ. 14,564 13,034 Univ. of Oklahoma 15,527 13,325 N.C. State 21,338 18,486 UNC - Chapel Hill 15,702 15,183 U. Southern Mississippi 9,868 9,182.5 Mississippi State 11,115 10,097 Univ. of Mississippi 7,946 7,510 LSU 20,374 17,763 Georgia State 16,849 12,928 Univ. of Georgia 23,653 22,734 Univ. of Arkansas 11,937 10,721 Auburn 18,615 17,697 Univ. of Alabama-B'ham 19,747 8,444 Univ. of Alabama - Tusc. 14,848 13,827 West Virginia Univ. 15,081 15,031 Univ. of Maryland . 24,373 22,139 Texas Tech 19,796 17,793 =46lorida State 22,554 19,667.1 =0C =85 The Tech student body is less diverse than at similar institutions= . Every institution in the following list is either less white, less male, or more international than Virginia Tech. Institution %Minorities %International %Female Virginia Tech 12.4 5.3 41.1 Univ. of Houston 37.7 6.8 51.2 Univ. of Texas-Austin 27.0 7.5 48.0 Univ. of Tennessee 7.9 4.4 50.3 USC-Columbia 18.6 4.1 56.9 Clemson 10.0 5.0 46.0 Oklahoma State 13.3 9.8 45.8 Univ. of Oklahoma 19.9 8.6 45.9 North Carolina State 15.5 3.8 41.2 UNC-Chapel Hill 15.7 3.2 57.7 Univ. of Southern Mississippi 22.0 2.0 57.0 Mississippi State 17.2 5.0 41.9 Univ. of Mississippi 12.5 4.9 50.8 LSU 14.6 6.5 50.5 Univ. of Kentucky 7.0 5.3 50.3 Georgia State 33.4 3.9 59.1 Univ. of Georgia 10.6 6.0 54.0 Univ. of Arkansas 10.5 4.3 46.7 Univ. of Alabama-Birmingham 25.7 3.3 55.5 Univ. of Alabama-Tuscaloosa 12.3 4.6 51.5 West Virginia Univ. 6.2 4.0 50.0 1995 SUG Average 17.1 5.3 50.0 (SUG =3D Southern Universities Group, a group of institutional research offices at similar southern universities which shares comparability data) =46or such a traditional student body, psychosocial development is a classically important reason for coming to college. These students are here for "the college experience," as much as for the education, and this psychosocial development occurs as much in out of class interactions and experiences as in the direct academic setting. For these students, a lot of very important learning is centered in the residential experience. Unless the demographics of the student body changes dramatically, the important motivation for selecting Virginia Tech is not likely to change. So the concept of moving away from a principally residential campus to a more distributed cybercampus, even for a substantial minority of our students, won't work unless we seek very different students from the ones we have now. The pool of high school and community college students who are available for recruitment will become much more diverse over the next 10 years nationwide. The college-going population of white students nationwide is stable. All growth is coming in students of color. And nationwide women make up the clear majority of college students, while Tech has been stable at about 40% women. This does NOT mean, however, that Virginia Tech will be successful in recruiting from that diversity. The composition of the student body by gender is dependent primarily on curriculum, and Virginia Tech appears to be retrenching back toward a more male-centered curriculum rather than expanding toward the comprehensive curriculum which is more attractive to most women students. The composition of the student body by race is dependent on location and reputation among minority communities. Virginia Tech is distant from the major African American population centers of the state and Tech does not enjoy a positive reputation among most African Americans in Virginia. Virginia Tech Alumni believe that developing skills in using computers is important, but many say they failed to achieve that while at Tech. Year % Important % Achieved 1987 92.4 57.1 1989 91.9 67.3 1992 93.8 67.8 This gap probably occurs primarily for students in non technical majors and for minority students who are less likely than their peers to own computers. Employers report satisfaction (surprise!) with the level of computer connectedness of Virginia Tech students in majors which require the purchase of a computer. Virginia Tech was among the first in the nation to have data, voice, and video connections in all residence hall rooms and now these are being converted to ethernet connections. Where purchase of a computer is required, that cost can be included in the student's financial aid budget. Virginia Tech students are relatively wealthy. 43% come from families with incomes greater than or equal to $75,000. 73% have incomes of $50,000. Increasing numbers of parents at orientation express expectations of upscale, "retail" treatment, and many don't mind paying extra for extra service. Given the availability of financial aid support for computer purchase, and the expectation of many parents to pay for a higher level of service, the concept of access which is central to the land-grant mission would probably not be violated if all students were required to purchase a computer in the freshman year. Use of computers is not always positive for students. =85 Not every student is comfortable getting online, yet many come fro= m high school believing that they are "computer literate." Some students have trouble asking for assistance. =85 A number of students at Tech and elsewhere develop addiction to computers, to the detriment of both academic and social life. =85 The psychosocial development which is part and parcel of universit= y life for traditional age students is accomplished through interpersonal interaction, not through isolation. This is of particular concern on a campus which has such traditional student body demographics. =85 As the environment becomes more high-tech, everyone needs even mor= e high-touch elements in their lives. =85 Cases of computer misuse are rising at Virginia Tech as elsewhere. Some days we have as many as a dozen cases of computer misuse reported. We averaged over two reports per day during September 1996. Some of these are serious - use of computers for direct threats or stalking. =85 Retention at Virginia Tech, as elsewhere, is hurt by the breakdown of connectedness between the student and the institution. Any activity which further isolates students makes retention more difficult. For some students, being involved with computers isolates them from involvement with students, faculty, and the institution in general. To create the kinds of "intimate" computer interactions between faculty and students which might overcome this problem is a very labor intensive operation. QUESTION: How can we enhance the residential, academic experience for a fairly traidtional student body using technology, while minimizing negative aspects for students? 1. Diagnose the computer capabilities of all students at entry by major and prescribe workshops or classes as needed to get students up-to-speed based on the needs of their own majors. 2. Make a strong push for adaptive technologies for students with disabilities. This is a case where technology has only positive effects. 3. Require computer purchase and use in more disciplines. 4. Provide strong supports and challenges for the developmental issues which surround increased computer use. 5. Improve the infrastructure for everyone. (Can we all get on meeting maker - ever??) 6. Develop the cost- and time-saving uses of technology right away - e.g., electronic publishing, electronic contacts with students and potential students, etc. ############################################################################= ## Cathryn T. Goree Phone: 540-231-3787 Dean of Students FAX: 540-231-4035 Virginia Tech TDD: 540-231-8718 107 Brodie Hall Blacksburg, VA 24061-0255