ost research at a community college is applied. Its purpose often is to provide information on issues relevant to the mission of the college such as, "How have enrollment patterns changed in the past ten years?" "Are students' learning?" "Do completers get jobs or transfer to a four-year college?" This information is often used by administrators in their policy and decision making. This is not to say that theoretical research does not have a role; but applied research supports a plethora of issues related to the mission and purposes of most community colleges.

Research at community colleges is often conducted, facilitated or aided by the institutional research office. Parkland College [ Champaign , IL ] has been fortunate to have an institutional research office to provide information and research support to the College for at least the last 15 years. In 2000, George Johnston and I had characterized the role of institutional research at Parkland as alchemy-turning data into information to aid administrators in their decision-making. In 2001, we characterized institutional research's role as "working in a data mine"-using a variety of tools to probe into a vast store of raw material (data) in search of information "gems." The focus at the time for our research program was to generate reliable, consistent information from a vast amount of data.

Data Warehouses. Much of these research pieces important in the last decade are still important today. One example is data warehouse management, the process of establishing consistent data collection and storage procedures to ensure quick and accurate retrieval. Most warehouses nowadays use extraction methods to create snapshots instead of using "live" data. This method increases reliability and enables the researcher to provide information quickly and efficiently. At Parkland , regular course and student attribute extractions from our Student Information System are stored in SPSS so that statistical analyses can be conducted without reformatting datasets. Currently at Parkland , these data are only available to the research staff but research is being conducted to develop methods to deliver the data directly to stakeholders throughout the campus.

Fact Books. Another example is the college fact book. The purpose of these factbooks is to provide a digest of information about the college for decision making, so that stakeholders are not relying on anecdotes or bias. Because there are different levels of decisions at a college, it should not be surprising that there are different types of fact books.

Parkland creates two types of annual fact books. The first, called Environmental Scanning Data , is available as a brochure or on the Internet (http://www.parkland.edu/oire/Envsc06.pdf). This fact book is designed for a general audience, both within the college and the community. The document, updated annually at the beginning of the spring semester, provides a series of tables that address some of the most frequently asked questions about the college, such as "Who are our students?" "What is our enrollment?" "Who employs our graduates?" "Who are our employees?" This fact sheet serves several purposes: It provides descriptive information about the college, shows short-term (2-5 year) changes, and also provides baseline information.

The second fact book is called Performance Indicators and is updated annually at the end of the fiscal year. This document provides 5-year trend data, benchmarks, and goals for key areas such as asset maintenance, enrollment patterns, student achievement, and economic accessibility/affordability. These key areas were selected by college decision-makers as critical issues to monitor. From these indicators, college-wide strategic initiatives were derived for all areas of the college to focus on. Progress towards meeting these goals is monitored annually.

Surveys. Surveys are regularly used to assess the campus environment and satisfaction with it. Typically, survey respondents are asked to indicate how important the given statements are as well as the extent to which they agreed or disagreed, were satisfied or dissatisfied with them.

Parkland conducts three climate surveys during the spring semester on alternate-year cycles. Two of the surveys are student surveys. On odd-numbered years, the college conducts the Community College Student Survey of Engagement (CCSSE), a national survey which measures student engagement in academic and non-academic areas. The second survey, offered in even-numbered years, is a college-developed satisfaction and climate survey. The purpose of this survey is to gather information on program and service satisfaction, diversity issues, faculty and student composition, and social interactions among various lines: gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and disability status. The remaining survey is a college-developed staff satisfaction/climate survey, with a similar structure as the student survey. Samples of these surveys can be found at our website (http://www.parkland.edu/oire/oiredata.htm). The Office of Institutional Research and Evaluation (OIRE) is responsible for administering and compiling the results of these surveys and sharing that information with faculty and staff. Focus groups are sometimes used to provide follow-up to the quantitative data.

Parkland also conducts a survey of all its program completers beginning six weeks after graduation to measure satisfaction with college courses, programs, and services as well as employment information (for career-program students) and continuing education information (for transfer students). In addition, for some career programs, annual employer surveys are distributed to the employers of our graduates. These surveys assess the satisfaction with and the skills of our graduates. Results are used to support program evaluation and career information for current students.

Accountability. At least half of all the research conducted by the OIRE for Parkland is for accountability purposes. Research of this type typically is conducted to demonstrate, often to an outside agency, that the college is doing what it says it is doing.

Parkland College is a part of one of the largest community college systems in the country. The Illinois Community College Board (ICCB) regulates and monitors the activities of 39 public community college districts throughout the state. As a part of this regulating process, at least 20 submissions must be made to ICCB on an annual basis. Included in some of these submissions are evaluation reports such as Program Review, Underrepresented Groups, and a review of whether Illinois educational goals are being met by the college (Performance Report). There are also a series of data submissions, such as apportionment datasets, enrollment datasets (annual and fall 10th day), and graduate completer satisfaction data. In return, ICCB submits data from the colleges to the federal Integrated Postsecondary Educational Data System (IPEDS). Colleges also receive data as to whether their students have enrolled at other Illinois colleges and whether they completed a program of study (Shared enrollment and completions data).

Each college appoints a coordinator for this information, and at Parkland , the Director of Institutional Research, Evaluation and Planning is responsible for coordinating these annual submissions. The advantages of the research office coordinating these reports and data submissions are consistent definitions, reduced redundancy in data collection, reliable data, and experienced evaluators working with review teams to provide analyses.

The regional accreditation self-study is another example of accountability reporting. Parkland participates in the 10-year North Central Association accreditation process. [For the most recent visit], employee committees were formed to monitor academic assessment and support unit assessment throughout the ten-year cycle. The OIRE works with these committees in an advisory capacity, providing reports and advice on the on-going analyses. Institutional Research also worked with the employee teams formed to write the self-study chapters to provide information and evaluation advice to the committees. The final conclusions are the result of consensus, discussion, and analysis from the committee, and necessarily the sole result of the research office.

Customized Analyses. In addition to the research conducted through climate, satisfaction, engagement, and completions surveys, customized analyses are also prepared. Curriculum assessment, labor market analyses, grant evaluations, enrollment management research, and academic outcomes research are conducted by OIRE working with stakeholders to identify each area's needs separately, providing customized solutions.

The Changing Role of Research

When George Johnston and I characterized institutional research in 2001 as "working in a data mine" we cautioned our audience that institutional researchers need to be involved in projects from the beginning, to facilitate the entire research process. At that time, we had already found that our most successful research required a team approach; our institutional self-study was the impetus for this expanded research role. The role of the institutional researcher in that process was to serve as a research "coach," guiding chapter committees in their research process, and supplying information to address their questions.

According to Borden (2004), the role of institutional research has gone from simply providing information to support policy and decision making to facilitating "organizational learning for the continuous improvement of higher education institutions and systems." The shift in the role of the institutional research office is a signal that the function research serves in a community college is changing as well. In the past five years at Parkland , the role of research has evolved from providing information to facilitating organizational learning by embracing an ongoing, continuous improvement process. Research has gone from being reactive , where information was requested by decision-makers to examine issues to interactive , where researchers are a part of decision-making teams working with practitioners to develop methods from the very beginning of a project. In other words, research is critical in the prospective as well as the retrospective, and the institutional researcher is doing more than working in the mines. Institutional researchers are also serving as coaches, guiding research teams to develop their projects with measurable objectives in mind.

Retention. One of the best examples of collaborative organizational learning is through Parkland 's work with retaining under prepared students. Not long ago, it became apparent to the Parkland board, administration, and faculty that many of its students were arriving on campus unprepared to handle college level courses; consequently, a relatively large number of students were enrolling in one or, at most, two semesters before dropping out. In the fall 2001 semester, more than 75% of first-time students from district high schools were in need of one developmental (remedial) course; at least 45% of first-time students required two or more developmental courses. Approximately 8% of the overall college seat count was in developmental courses, and the number was increasing. A disproportionate number of under-prepared students and those who failed to make satisfactory progress were minority students (and the minority population at the College is growing). In fall 2002, 44% of those on academic risk status were minorities, although the population was only 26% minority at the time. Under-preparedness and a failure to make satisfactory progress have resulted in low persistence rate (term to term and year to year). The persistence rate from fall 2001 to fall 2002 for first-time, full-time freshmen was 63.6% percent; for degree-seeking students, the rate was 66.2%. The College was losing over a third of its degree-seeking freshmen students from one year to the next. This in turn resulted in relatively low graduation and transfer rates. Of a 1999 cohort of first-time, full-time, degree-seeking students, only 57.7% had completed their course of study in 150 percent time or transferred to another institution within three years.

The College believed that increasing students' preparedness for college-level courses would result in more students being able to enter their chosen field of study and progress toward graduation more quickly. Parkland made a commitment to provide comprehensive services to these under-prepared populations through the creation the Academic Development Center , later enhanced by a Title III grant from the U.S. Department of Education. The Center has created an advisory committee called the "project management team" which consists of practitioners, administrators, and institutional researchers. They meet monthly to review research, evaluate center services, and develop new strategies.

Strategies were selected through a review of best practices and discussions with faculty, staff, administrators, and students at the College. The OIRE provided the research support and challenged the teams to build assessment and evaluation into their actions. Measurable objectives were set and baseline data were obtained using Parkland 's well-established institutional research databases. Objectives are reviewed semi-annually, using both student-level and program-level assessments, and the information obtained from these reviews serves as knowledge for new initiatives. As a result, these strategies have been transformational, college-wide, and are truly helping Parkland 's under-prepared students achieve their academic goals. Several of these strategies are highlighted below.

Student Development Advocates . Two full-time Advocates provide significant outreach to students in developmental courses by monitoring progress and connecting students with needed services before situations become irreparable. By the second year of the program, 78% of those receiving Advocate services in the fall returned in the spring semester, compared to 61% of those declining services . By the second year of the grant, 51.7% of those receiving advocate services returned in the fall 2005 semester, compared to 47.7% of developmental students not served by the center. Further, students receiving services earned nearly 20% more credits in 2004-05 than those who did not.

Facilitated Study Groups (FSGs). Research suggests that developmental students can benefit greatly from the additional time-on-task offered through these groups. These study groups, led by full-time mathematics faculty, target difficult courses rather than difficult students. The activities in these groups are comprised of academic diagnosis, study skills, professional tutoring, supplemental instruction, academic follow-up, and, when appropriate, computer-assisted instruction.

There is evidence of success in the data we have gathered. For fall 2004 and spring 2005 participants, when success was defined as earning a "D" or better, FSG participants had higher success rates than non-participants in all remedial math courses. Further analyses were conducted to explore whether length of stay in the sessions had any effect on success. FSG participants were categorized as two groups depending on average length of stay per individual: 0­ to 60 minutes (54 students) and longer than 60 minutes (62 students). Compared to non-participants, students who attended FSGs 60 minutes or less were less successful when success was defined as a "C" or better grade. When success was defined as a "D" or better grade, students who attended FSGs 60 minutes or less were more successful. Shorter periods of time in FSGs (e.g., on average, 60 minutes or less) were shown to be effective in helping students pass the course but not substantially in improving their grade. Longer time intervals increased the students' chances of substantially improving their grade. Thus, it appears that the length of time spent in FSGs does have an impact on success in those [difficult] mathematics courses.

The Future of Research

Community colleges, including Parkland , still have a long way to go. Borden (2004) has some suggestions for the future of research:

• Accountability demands are increasing; we must keep moving forward and engaging the campus community in the research process from the beginning. It is too easy to focus on information support only.


• Colleges need to make the move from using information to make decisions to using the knowledge obtained from this information to drive planning for the future.


• Researchers need to engage the questions and questioners in the learning process to facilitate organizational learning.


• Researchers need to enlist the organization in the interpretation of data, and reduce the dependence upon the research office for this interpretation.

For the community college administrator, this means including institutional and other researchers in project teams to aid in the development of curricula and services, not just relying on them for information support to evaluate existing services.

Research has become an integral part of the community college environment. Every area of Parkland College , academic and support service alike, at least uses information to guide their decision-making. While the topics of interest (e.g., enrollment management) have not changed significantly, the way we use research in our decision-making process has. We have expanded the role of research from merely using data to guide decision-making, to using the knowledge obtained from that research to guide our planning and development of new initiatives. We have taken our commitment to student-centered learning and applied it to the organization. Research has become the instrument to facilitate organizational learning, and the role of the institutional researcher has expanded to include coaching the organization in its own learning.

Dr. Sharon Kristovich is the Director of Institutional Research, Evaluation and Planning at Parkland College and serves as Membership Coordinator for NCCRP and IAIR. She can be reached at skristovich@parkland.edu.

Borden, V. M. H. (2004). Institutional Research as Collaborative Institutional Learning. Paper presented at the 33rd Annual meeting of the Illinois Association for Institutional Research, Oakbrook, IL.

Johnston, G.H., & Kristovich, S.A.R. (2000). Community college alchemists: Turning data into information. In D. Robillard (Ed.), New Directions for Institutional Research, 109. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.

Kristovich, S.A.R. & Kim, J. (2006). Environmental Scanning Data. Champaign, IL: Parkland College.

Kristovich, S.A.R & Johnston, G.H. (2001, March). Working in a data mine: The role of the Institutional Research Office in the Self-Study Process. Paper presented at the 106th Annual Meeting of the North Central Association/Higher Learning Commission, Chicago, IL.