Completed Assessment Reports | Student Congress

Department Assessment Report

Service/Department: Hope College Admissions Office

Date Approved by General Congress: February 27, 2023
Semester: Fall 2022
Service/Department Lead: Nate Haveman
Supervisor of Department Lead: President Scogin
Chief of Assessment: Joshua Haddad
Chief of Assessment Elect: Elle Oom

Most Significant Data Points

1,025 respondents (approximately 78%) agree that their student experience mirrors what they learned during the admissions process.
Approximately 36% of respondents (n = 322) noted that their admission process was personalized at Hope College, in which they received admission letters with their names or were given access to certain experiences such as participating in class sessions.
Only 35 respondents (3.85%) reported that Hope’s admission process was not different from other schools they applied to.

Interview Main Takeaways

The college is putting a lot of effort and money into the admissions process.
Hope College wants prospective students to get on campus, because once students end up on campus they have a much higher chance of coming to Hope.
The Hope Forward initiative continues to motivate the staff, and runs on generosity which is a pillar of our Christian ideals.

Recommendation Overview

Create a better picture of continuity between student experiences and the mission of the college.
- Via social media
- Via programming
Programming to get current students on board with Hope Forward.
- Partner with departments that are also stakeholders
- Generosity lives in the current student body as well, and the students want to take a more active role in the conversation.

Download the full Admissions Assessment Report

Executive Summary

Semester: Spring 2024
Department: Advising Services
Director of FYS and Academic Advising: Dr. Ryan White
Academic Advising Staff: Krista Carter, Alyssa Boss-Pelegrino
Supervisor of Dept. Head: Provost Griffin
Chief of Assessment: Eric Alsgaard

Most Significant Data Points:

Students agree that when registering for classes, their primary academic advisor has been helpful and knowledgeable of their general education/Anchor Plan requirements (88.5%), their major-specific requirements (85.8%), and student registration and advising tools (90.1%). Responses were consistent across student cohorts, except for knowledge of major-specific course requirements, where first-year and sophomore students had a lower level of agreement.
Across most advisor types, students had the lowest level of agreement that their advising included discernment regarding their future major. This was the lowest for Pre-Law advising (8.4%) and First Year Seminar advising (46.1%)
A theme identified in 10.6% of open-ended responses (n=93) is that advisors are not aware of academic programs outside of their own and are not able to advise on a second major or minor. A related data point is that among all respondents, only 17.7% indicated they have a second major advisor.
Of the students (n=9) who said they have experienced bias, discrimination, or harassment from an advisor, the highest percentage were U.S. Students of Color (66%).

Interview Main Takeaways:

Decentralized: No cocurricular office holistically owns the advising process. Academic departments are responsible for assigning students to major-specific advisors; the Registrar covers potential gaps in advising, and Advising Services staff are responsible for equipping advisors with information regarding the Anchor Plan, DegreeWorks, and other professional development opportunities.
Advisor training: FYS professors all act as undeclared faculty advisors and therefore receive first-year seminar advising training. New professors receive advising training as part of Initium, but they do not act as advisors until they have been at Hope for one year in order to develop experience with Hope’s culture and the Anchor Plan. This creates potential gaps in advising training, as it is received but not practiced for a full year.
Advisor evaluation: There are currently no structures in place for students to evaluate their advisors. This proves complicated due to the dual-nature of faculty as advisors and professors. Advising staff expressed the desire to implement a structure to assess advisors by department.

Recommendation Overview*:
* Full recommendations and details found in Section 6.

With the Office of the Provost, develop an annual advising survey to be distributed with course evaluations.
With the Vice President of Culture and Inclusive Excellence, the Center for Diversity and Inclusion, and the academic deans, identify methods to address incidents of discrimination or bias within Advising Services.

Download the full Spring 2024 Advising Services Assessment Report

Department Assessment Report

Service/Department: The Boerigter Center for Calling and Career
Date Approved by General Congress: December 6, 2021
Semester: Fall 2021
Service/Department Lead: Shonn Colbrunn
Vice-President: Dr. Gerald Griffin
Task Force: Academic Affairs

Task Force Chair: Devin White

________________________________________________________________________

Section 1: Overview of Department and Assessment Goals

1a: Department Overview

The Boerigter Center for Calling and Career helps students' professional skill development and educational and career choices. This department offers one-on-one advising, professional development sessions, resume help, interview training, and guidance in selecting majors and career paths. The Boerigter Center for Calling and Career helps students pursue their passion through intentionality with coursework, resume development, professionalism, internships, graduate school applications, interviews, and job applications, bringing students closer to their vocational trajectory.

1b: Assessment Goals

Assessment is a function of Student Congress that gathers data on all Hope College offices, services and entities over a three year cycle. The Student Congress’ Assessment function will assess student satisfaction with Hope College’s co-curricular activities, providing crucial information about the student experience by analyzing student data, interview data and public documents from the respective department. The Assessments Committee, Frost Center for Data and Research, and Student Congress task forces will partner with each department to assess Hope College’s structures and services to determine how effectively they are serving all students at Hope College.

Download the full Fall 2021 Boerigter Center for Calling and Career Assessment Report

Campus Ministries Assessment Report

Executive Summary

Semester: Spring 2022
Department Name: Campus Ministries
Department Head(s): Trygve Johnson, Jennifer Ryden
Supervisor of Department Head: Matthew Scogin

Most Significant Data Points:

75.3% of students indicated they were satisfied or very satisfied with Chapel.
Only 56.4% of students who had used the Athletics Ministry Weekly Devotional indicated
they were satisfied or very satisfied.
79.8% of students agree or strongly agree with the statement that Campus Ministries
“Offers me hospitality,” which had the highest rating out of a list of ways Campus
Ministries guides or helps them.
Major themes for improvement included concerns of diversity (students of color,
LGBTQ+ students, and denominational/theistic diversity), wanting more engagement
and events with/for students, and a desire for deeper topics covered in services.

Interview Main Takeaways:

Covenant Partnerships are designed to help students connect to a church that fulfills the
spiritual needs that Campus Ministries/Hope departments may not provide.
The main challenge is to “nurture students of all backgrounds,” which is a responsibility
that the chaplains consider to be part of Campus Ministries' mission.
The chaplains are seeking other areas in Campus Ministries that could be student-led.
There is no formal way that Campus Ministries gauges student feedback.

Recommendation Overview:

Resume Covenant Partnerships with churches in the Holland area, and develop resources
for students to engage with local churches.
Continue to evaluate student engagement with The Gathering, recognizing the role that
Campus Ministries plays in helping students worship and keep the Sabbath.
Formalize a regular method of collecting student feedback.

Download the full Spring 2022 Campus Ministries Assessment Report

Department Assessment Report

Service/Department: Campus Safety

Date Approved by General Congress: December 6, 2021
Semester: Fall 2021
Service/Department Lead: Officer Jeff Hertel
Vice-President: Kara Slater
Task Force: Administrative Affairs

Task Force Chair: Helen Weston, Josh Abbas

_______________________________________________________________________

Section 1: Overview of Department and Assessment Goals

1a: Department Overview

Campus Safety exists to enhance the security and protection of people and property at Hope College. Campus Safety partners with Residence Life, Student Life, Counseling and Psychological Services, the Holland Department of Public Safety, and Ottawa County Emergency Management Office to offer support and resources for students, faculty, administration, and college employees. The Department of Campus Safety includes nearly two dozen individuals, a dozen of whom are professional public safety officers with years of law enforcement experience. Campus Safety is available to students twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. They prioritize visibility and desire to create a safer community by building relationships with students and staff. Campus Safety offers a variety of services to students and staff including self-defense training, off-campus transportation, locksmith, lost and found, ID cards, escort services, 24/7 patrol, parking information, and assistance with car problems.

1b: Assessment Goals

Assessment is a function of Student Congress that gathers data on all Hope College offices, services and entities over a three year cycle. The Student Congress’ Assessment function will assess student satisfaction with Hope College’s co-curricular activities, providing crucial information about the student experience by analyzing student data, interview data and public documents from the respective department. The Assessments Committee, Frost Center for Data and Research, and Student Congress task forces will partner with each department to assess Hope College’s structures and services to determine how effectively they are serving all students at Hope College.

Download the full Fall 2021 Campus Safety Assessment Report

Center for Diversity and Inclusion Assessment Report

Executive Summary

Semester: Spring 2022
Department Name: CDI
Department Head(s): Jevon Willis, Margo Walters
Supervisor of Department Head: Jennifer Fellinger

Most Significant Data Points:

85% of students who utilize Keppel House indicate they were satisfied or very satisfied
with their physical safety in and around Keppel House. The aspect of Keppel House with
which students are least satisfied is the convenience of the lock system. 32.5% of students
utilizing Keppel House indicate they were not satisfied or not at all satisfied.
38.3% of all students indicate they would access services or programs related to cultural
competency and 41.9% indicate they would access services or programs related to allyship
training and engagement.
45.4% of respondents reported being educated on privilege, implicit bias, or
microagressions in the context of race, socioeconomics, sexual identity/orientation,
gender, and ability throughout their time at Hope College. Only 9.8% reported never
receiving this education.

Interview Main Takeaways:

The greatest identified challenge for CDI is how increasing diversity calls for increased
need for support resources. With only two full time employees and growing diversity on
campus, this challenge becomes increasingly more difficult.
Faculty and Staff do not represent the groups that CDI work with, especially within
administration, thus making representation and structural progress challenging.
One of Hope’s cultural values is tradition. This can ignite resistance when Hope needs to
change who it can be and how Hope can operate in the future.

Recommendation Overview:

Explore opportunities for partnership with other groups on campus such as Campus
Ministries, Greek Life, and/or the Boerigter Center for Calling and Career.
Install an improved lock system for the entrance of the Keppel House.
Ideate what “Culture & Inclusion” and “the Center for Diversity and Inclusion” should
mean and how these meanings can help refine individual support for students.

Download the full Spring 2022 Center for Diversity and Inclusion Assessment Report

Executive Summary

Semester: Spring 2023
Department: Counseling and Psychological Services
Director: Rekha Varghese, Psy.D., LP
Chief of Assessment: Joshua Haddad
Vice Chief of Assessment: Elle Oom

Most Significant Data Points:

383 respondents (30.9%) indicated that they have used services offered by CAPS.

68.3% agreed with the statement that CAPS has provided services that help support them emotionally. Looking at each class year, sophomores responded most positively to this statement and positive student responses generally decrease from first to senior year.

Among the 855 respondents who have not used services offered by CAPS, 24 indicated that they have tried to use CAPS services and 18 explained why their experience was not successful. An additional 133 of the 855 students indicated that they would like to use CAPS services in the future and 102 of these students provided an explanation of what has been limiting them from doing so.

Interview Main Takeaways:

Same-Day Scheduling: “Same-day” scheduling is pertinent to Counseling and Psychological Services goals in being able to support students in the most flexible and accessible way possible. Without this system they would risk long waitlists and session limits for each student looking for counseling. For students who would benefit from weekly scheduled sessions that option is available for them based on a conversation with their counselor.
Phone Scheduling: To schedule an appointment at CAPS, a student has the option to call in for a same day appointment, or go to CAPS in person to create an appointment.
Substance Abuse Specialization: As of right now, there are no counselors at Hope CAPS who specialize in substance abuse. Their first step in implementing more support for students struggling with substance abuse is looking to hire a substance abuse educator. Starting with education, before stepping into treatment.
Culture/Diversity: It would be impossible for the counselors at CAPS to include every identifier or every student that walks through the door. Furthermore, many identifiers are invisible and you would never know about your counselor. What is more pertinent to CAPS at this time is ensuring that all of their therapists are culturally competent.

Recommendation Overview:

Develop and implement a fully-confidential online scheduling process on a trial run basis.
Include supplemental information regarding each counselor on the Hope College CAPS website.
Further educate the student body on substance abuse issues and provide greater support for struggling students.

Download the full Spring 2023 CAPS Assessment Report

Department Assessment Report

Service/Department: Creative Dining Services

Date Approved by General Congress: December 6, 2021
Semester: Fall 2021
Service/Department Lead: Sue Schierbeek, Dan Zehr
Vice-President: Tom Bylsma
Task Force: Campus Life

Task Force Chair: Anders Bogard

________________________________________________________________________

Section 1: Overview of Department and Assessment Goals

1a: Department Overview

Hope Dining, operated jointly by Hope College and Creative Dining services, is a group tasked with serving the Hope College community for dining needs and services. Their goal is to provide the best possible dining experience for students, faculty, staff, and the community. Hope Dining’s services include Phelps Dining Hall, Cook Dining Hall, the Kletz Market, and Cup & Chaucer (when it is in operation).

1b: Assessment Goals

Assessment is a function of Student Congress that gathers data on all Hope College offices, services and entities over a three year cycle. The Student Congress’ Assessment function will assess student satisfaction with Hope College’s co-curricular activities, providing crucial information about the student experience by analyzing student data, interview data and public documents from the respective department. The Assessments Committee, Frost Center for Data and Research, and Student Congress task forces will partner with each department to assess Hope College’s structures and services to determine how effectively they are serving all students at Hope College.

Download the full Fall 2021 Creative Dining Services Assessment Report

Executive Summary

Semester: Spring 2023
Department: Disability and Accessibility Resources (DAR)
Director: Carrie Dattels
Chief of Assessment: Joshua Haddad
Vice Chief of Assessment: Elle Oom

Most Significant Data Points:

Among students indicating that they would like to access services in the future, 37 identified barriers that have thus prevented them from doing so. Approximately one-third (32.4%) indicated they were not sure whether they need assistance, are eligible, or if the assistance would be helpful, and 24.3% indicated personal issues (including personal reasons and time conflicts) as the reason they have not accessed DAR services.
Among those who have previously contacted DAR, 66.9% of respondents (n=245) agreed with the statement that DAR advocates for disabled students to have access to the same level of service from campus offices as is available to non-disabled students, first-year students (72.7%) and sophomores (71.4%) responded more positively to this statement than did juniors (62.1%) and seniors (64.5%).

Interview Main Takeaways:

Faculty Involvement: If a faculty member believes an accommodation requested through DAR fundamentally alters the course, they can submit a dispute. If a student is not properly being accommodated by a faculty member, they can submit a report for a formal or informal resolution through the equity and compliance office. For a student this process can be long and may impact their accessibility to the classroom in the meantime. Furthermore, this potentially creates an environment where students do not come forward and faculty are not held accountable for their administration of accommodations.
Accommodation vs. Accessibility Model: Currently, Hope College runs on an accommodation based model, meaning that a change is made one time, to accommodate a specific person during their time at Hope. The DAR office however desires to shift the campus community, culture, and language to an accessibility based model, where rather than solving issues students with disabilities on campus have, we would prevent these issues by promoting accessibility overall.

Recommendation Overview:

Work with Student Congress, CDI, and other relevant departments on the creation and proposal of an Accessibility Policy for Hope College.
Increase Physical Accessibility on Campus.
Develop a structure to assess the relationship between faculty and students they are serving in their allocation of accommodations.
Work to create a strong relationship with departments at Hope College that function similarly to DAR, such as CDI.
Utilize outside resources to connect students to Disability and Accessibility Resources and help them better understand how to utilize them.
Work to develop and implement an official process for short-term and long-term absences (i.e., due to medical leave).
Strive to increase staffing to better serve the growing number of students who require support from Disability and Accessibility Resources.

Download the full Spring 2023 DAR Assessment Report

Equity and Compliance Office Assessment Report

Executive Summary

Semester: Spring 2022
Department Name: Equity and Compliance Office
Department Head(s): Sara Dorer, Lyonel LaGrone, Jill Whitcomb, Kelsey Colburn
Supervisor of Department Head: Jennifer Fellinger

Most Significant Data Points:

31% of students are not confident at all that they could describe the role of the Equity and
Compliance office.
35% of students feel that there is a lack of information and communication available to
them about the duties of the Equity and Compliance office.
45.0% approximately half of students indicated they were not confident in the process
which follows the submission of a Discrimination/Harassment Reporting Form.

Interview Main Takeaways:

Not many students have direct and regular contact with the Equity and Compliance
office, so students often have a limited understanding of its functions.
Students can come to the Equity and Compliance office with concerns and the result does
not have to be the filing of a report.
The department is undergoing structural changes and newly hired staff. The
development of each employee’s specific role and function causes strain for the staff.
Although the work of Equity and Compliance is highly reactive by nature, the staff would
like to work on more proactive and preventative projects.

Recommendation Overview:

Implement passive touchpoints to increase student awareness of the office.
Examine and identify ambiguity between Hope College regulations and both federal and
local laws or regulations. Explore how student confusion impacts individuals and can be
creatively remedied.
Collect multiple forms of student feedback.
Increase methods to inform students about the Title IX process.

Download the full Spring 2022 Equity and Compliance Office Assessment Report

Executive Summary

Semester: Spring 2024
Department: Financial Aid
Director of Financial Aid: Jill Nutt
Supervisor of Dept. Head: Tom Bylsma, CFO
Chief of Assessment: Eric Alsgaard

Most Significant Data Points:

Overall, students agree that the Office of Financial Aid provides relevant services and information on financial aid options (76.9%) and the federal financial aid application process (68.4%). About half (49.8%) agree that the office provides relevant services and information on budgeting and loan repayment.

There is decreasing consistency in responses from the first to the senior year that these three sets of services are provided. Most notably, first-year (57.3%) and senior (44.3%) agreement on budgeting and loan repayment services and information.

Students agree that the Office of Financial Aid provides services that are individualized and personable (77.8%), easily accessed (68.3%), and clearly advertised (54.9%).

Agreement on these three items decreases consistently from the first to the senior year, most notably that services are easily accessed which declines from 56.8% among first-year students to 45.2% among seniors.

Among respondents, 62.5% of students completed some or all of the FAFSA on their own or with another person. 24% indicate that others completed the FAFSA for them.
Within the 32 valid additional written comments regarding their experiences with the office, the most frequently cited theme (34%) expressed students' desire that the Office of Financial Aid be more accessible and visible, increase student awareness of what the office can provide, and provide workshops and other services.

Interview Main Takeaways:

Parent-facing, Student-serving: Students can walk into the office and get help with topics ranging from FAFSA to financial literacy skills, such as the loan repayment process. The office staff also works on student needs with parents directly. The Office of Financial Aid is also interested in understanding how to increase student ownership of their financial aid.
Scholarship/award amount: A common student misconception is that the Office of Financial Aid determines the monetary value of the financial aid package students receive. This is not the case: Financial Aid is “the messenger,” and helps students understand the process of paying for school. Financial Aid staff members focus on adherence to governmental rules and regulations and ensuring parents/students understand them.

Recommendation Overview*:
* Full recommendations and details found in Section 6.

With Business Services, identify which office is primarily responsible for budgeting and loan repayment services and information, and implement a plan to provide these to students.
Partner with the Boerigter Center for Calling and Career to offer “Life After Graduation” workshops, including information on budgeting, loan repayment, and other relevant financial responsibilities.
- This could be done in partnership with senior seminar classes.

Download the full Spring 2024 Financial Aid Assessment Report

Department Assessment Report

Service/Department: Hope College Health Center

Date Approved by General Congress: February 27, 2023
Semester: Fall 2022
Service/Department Lead: Cindy Sabo
Supervisor of Department Lead: Becky Starkenburg
Chief of Assessment: Joshua Haddad
Chief of Assessment Elect: Elle Oom

Most Significant Data Points:

65.4% of students reported interacting with or accessing services at the Health Center. This percentage increases significantly across the class years.
The Health Center provides various services, and the percentage of students who reported “Strongly agree” or “Agree” to each service varies from 58.59% to 75.12%. The percentage of students who reported “Strongly agree” or “Agree” to each service increases across class year for all categories, with treatment of illness/injury increasing the most.
71.45% of respondents agreed that overall their needs have been met by the Health Center.
The Health Center received positive feedback for convenient location and ease in scheduling appointments. However, 66 female students reported that their needs have not been met in the OB/GYN category.
1.05% of students reported experiencing bias, discrimination, or harassment from a Health Center staff member. Among these students, nine provided details on their experiences, indicating that they experienced bias or discrimination on the basis of their request for sexual health services or based on their vaccination decision.

Interview Main Takeaways:

The Health Center is interested in what would be a barrier for a student using the Health Center.
The Health Center is interested in where students would find the best use of the staffs’ energy and resources, and are looking into new areas of programming.

Recommendation Overview:

More robust orientation to the uses of the Health Center f0r first year students.
Partnership between Student Life, Health Center, Orientation
Students are looking for more time with OB/GYN, and Nutritionists - so expanding the time that they are available to students.
Students also need more resources over their 4 years, so keeping the website and social medias up to date in partnership with Public Affairs and Marketing

Download the full Fall 2022 Health Center Assessment Report

Executive Summary

Semester: Spring 2024
Department: Off-Campus Study
Senior Director of Off-Campus Study: Amy Quincey
Off-Campus Study Advisors: Katie Ulrich, Becky Thompson
Supervisor of Dept. Head: Provost Griffin
Chief of Assessment: Eric Alsgaard

Most Significant Data Points:

Overall, 18.7% of students in the sample indicated they had previously or are currently
participating in an Off-Campus study program with an additional 8.1% registered for an off-campus study program. 32.5% hope to participate in an Off-Campus study program, and 40.7% of students indicated none of the above. Of the 123 students who have, are, or are registered to study off-campus, only 21 (17.1%) are male. This percentage is not proportional to the overall campus demographic for Spring 2024 of 39.4% male, or the respondent sample of 26.4% male.
Financial accessibility is a theme in student responses, with 39.7% of respondents indicating that off-campus study is not financially accessible. In the open-ended responses (n=55), issues of financial accessibility accounted for 18.2% of responses.
More than one-quarter of students indicated that off-campus study programs are not available within their schedule or major/minor requirements. Of the 614 respondents to this item, 452 (72.3%) indicated that off-campus program opportunities are available within their schedule and 508 (81.3%) indicated the program options are relevant to their major. Within the open-ended responses, 21.8% of responses indicated an inability to study abroad due to a major or schedule.

Interview Main Takeaways:

Perceived barriers: the Off-Campus Study staff was greatly interested in understanding
perceived barriers preventing students from studying abroad. Identified complications include the fear of missing out on campus events, financial barriers, and high involvement such as athletics or student leadership. Collected data reaffirms these barriers.
Individualized advising: Students undergo personalized advising from staff and peer advisors surrounding their academic and extracurricular commitments. Furthermore, if students are interested in a program that isn’t available, they can appeal or push to run the program as a one-time engagement.

Recommendation Overview*:
* Full recommendations and details found in Section 6.

Partner with Hope Forward to reduce financial inaccessibility of Off-Campus Study programs to continue educating students for a life of leadership and service in a global society.
Develop additional Off-Campus Study programs and marketing towards low-engagement academic disciplines, such as Natural and Applied Sciences.

Download the full Spring 2024 Off-Campus Study Assessment Report

Executive Summary

Semester: Fall 2023
Department: Orientation Programs
Associate Dean of Student Life: Ellen Awad
Assistant Director of Student Life: Andrew Haggerty
Chief of Assessment: Eric Alsgaard

Most Significant Data Points:

Of the 981 respondents who indicated they participated in one or more orientation
programs, 951 participated in First-Year Orientation, 37 in Transfer Student Orientation,
28 in International Student Orientation, 47 in Step2Success, and 50 in Summer Bridge.
Students who indicated that they did not participate in an orientation program were
asked why they did not participate. Of the 105 students who indicated they did not participate, 68 provided a reason for not participating. Thirteen (19%) indicated a lack of relevance, 10 (15%) indicated a schedule conflict, and 8 (12%) indicated other reasons. In this item, 35 of the 68 respondents appeared to misunderstand the question.
Students indicate that participation in an orientation program transitioned them well into the institution's student resources (4.06/5.00), involvement opportunities (3.99/5.00), campus culture (3.96/5.00), student responsibilities (3.88/5.00), and educational opportunities (3.84/5.00)
Overall, 62.4% of students indicated that they made a connection with an upper-class student, advisor, or other on-campus individual whom they could go to for support. This value varied by cohort year with 79.8% of first-year students, 62.7% of sophomore students, 52.6% of junior students, and 60.7% of senior students responding yes.
Students were provided with an opportunity to submit additional written comments regarding their experiences with Orientation Programs. Of the 143 responses, the most common themes were: the negative impacts of COVID-19 on orientation in Fall 2020 (19.6%); concerns regarding the pace and schedule of orientation (13.3%); and concerns regarding preparation and organization of Orientation Leaders and Assistants (13.3%).

Interview Main Takeaways:

Student volunteers: A large number of orientation assistants is required to keep new student Orientation cohorts to the ‘ideal size of 8-12 students.’ These OAs are also chosen in pairs to ensure multiple viewpoints and consistency in messaging. This requires approximately 170-180 student leaders, which may influence the OA quality across cohorts.
Family and student programs: Families of new students may attend various seminars and events throughout Orientation weekend. Some content such as academic expectations may be present in family Orientation modules but missing from student modules.

Recommendation Overview*:
* Full recommendations and suggestions found in Section 6.

In tandem with the Dean’s Council, investigate the overall presence of content surrounding educational opportunities within Orientation, and implement any identified improvements.
- This could be additional content modules surrounding ‘a week in the life of a college student,’ the addition of students to the parent-focused academic sessions, or other similar ideas.
With the Campus Life board, re-evaluate the specific content modules within Orientation intended to facilitate peer-to-peer connection.
Identify campus stakeholders and develop practices to ensure the quality and consistent preparation of orientation assistants across the unique student groups present within Orientation.
- An example of this could be an OA review form for students to complete after their orientation is complete.

Download the full Fall 2023 Orientation Programs Assessment Report

Executive Summary

Semester: Fall 2023
Department: Physical Plant
Director of Department: Kara Slater
Chief of Assessment: Eric Alsgaard

Most Significant Data Points:

Overall, 1,008 respondents (90.7%) indicated they are ‘Satisfied’ or ‘Very Satisfied’ with the
facilities at Hope College, and find them clean, safe, and well-maintained.
52.7% of respondents (585 students) indicated they had submitted a work order request to
the Physical Plant office during their time at Hope College.

Of the students who had submitted a work-order request, 87.9% thought that
Physical Plant provided a quality solution, 84.8% thought Physical Plant provided a timely solution, and 77.3% indicated that Physical Plant was clear with communication.
Of the students who had not submitted a work order to Physical Plant (526 students), 71.3% indicated their facilities didn’t require work and 22.4% indicated they did not know they could submit a work order request.

Overall, students indicated the area of campus that needs the most improvement is Residential Halls (53.8%), followed by Cottages and Apartments (22.6%).

56.8% of First-Year students selected Residential Halls when asked which area of campus needed the most upgrading, compared with 48.2% of sophomores, 30.8% of juniors, and 32.8% of seniors.
The most frequently cited residential halls that students indicate need improvement are: Kollen Hall (142), Voorhees Hall (75), and Dykstra Hall (55). The most frequently cited cottages and apartments that students indicate need improvement are Brumler Apartments (19) College East Apartments (13) Venema Apartments (8) and Sigma Cottage (6).

Non-residential campus buildings that students indicate need improvement are the Dow Center and Paul A. Schaap Science Center.
Students were provided with an opportunity to submit additional written comments regarding their experiences with Physical Plant services. Of the 175 responses, the most common centered around scheduling appointments with students ahead of time and possible mold and mildew issues.

Interview Main Takeaways:

Physical accessibility: Physical Plant fulfills physical facilities-based accessibility requests that meet student needs. They also carry out the implementation of small-scale improvement measures through construction, such as the remodeling of a Phelps suite to full ADA-accessibility standards and filling rough patches of sidewalk concrete within the Pine Grove. Apart from an as-needed basis, Physical Plant works from an internal accessibility priority list, but was greatly interested in elevating student-voiced accessibility needs.
Work order marketing: Regardless of cohort or role, all students have access to the submission of work orders to request facility improvements. However, with only 52% of the student body having completed one, Physical Plant desires to increase marketing surrounding the process.

Recommendation Overview*:
* Full recommendations and suggestions found in Section 6.

With Student Congress’s Administrative Affairs task force, identify a structure to connect Physical Plant with student-voiced renovation and accessibility needs. This should also symbiotically educate the student body on the greater work of Physical Plant.
Using student responses from Question 4, identify areas of improvement within the most frequently-responded facilities in each category, and develop a strategy to implement such improvements. A communication plan should also be implemented to communicate renovations with the student body.
Determine methods to increase awareness and knowledge surrounding the work order submission process.
Re-evaluate the current process around alerting students on the status of their work orders, such as estimated technician arrival and completion, with the inclusion of student voices in this process.

Download the full Fall 2023 Physical Plant Assessment Report

Department Assessment Report

Service/Department: Hope College Registrar

Date Approved by General Congress: February 27, 2023
Semester: Fall 2022
Service/Department Lead: Carol Dejong
Supervisor of Department Lead: Dr. Gerald Griffin
Chief of Assessment: Joshua Haddad
Chief of Assessment Elect: Elle Oom

Most Significant Data Points:

The Registrar's Office at Hope College has generally applied policies and decisions equitably and students have experienced fair application of policies. However, there is a decline in the average rating from first-year students to seniors, and responses from white students are more positive than responses from students of color and international students.
Approximately 55% of students agree that the Registrar’s Office has ensured the accuracy and reliability of information they have collected and shared. However, about 32% of students indicated that they have not had enough experience with the Registrar’s Office to decide the level of their agreement with this statement.
The Registrar’s Office has treated students courteously and with respect, with no notable differences between responses from white students, students of color, and international students.
Only one student (0.079%) responded that they have experienced bias, discrimination, or harassment from a Registrar’s Office staff member. However, this student did not provide additional explanation.

Interview Main Takeaways:

The Registrar’s Office dislikes being painted as the “bad guy” in student affairs on campus — looking to change student perceptions.
The Registrar’s Office is a naturally student facing office, and would enjoy having more interactions with the students.

Recommendation Overview:

Create social-media led programming to better communicate policies and decisions from the Registrar’s Office.
Help first-year and first-gen students understand the registration process as best as possible.
Clear communication with the students as Hope College Degree Works changes for the credit switch.

Download the full Fall 2022 Registrar’s Office Assessment Report

Executive Summary

Semester: Spring 2023
Department: Residential Life and Housing
Associate Dean for Residential Life & Education: Kristyn Bochniak
Assistant Director: Molly DePew
Chief of Assessment: Joshua Haddad
Vice Chief of Assessment: Elle Oom

Most Significant Data Points:

77.3% of students (n=1,201) agreed that Residential Life and Housing sta have helped foster community and belonging in their residential community, and 73.6% of students (n=1,197) agreed that they felt like they could get involved in the community in their residential hall and/or neighborhood if they wanted to.
When asked about what they would like to see more in their residential hall/cottage/apartment common spaces, 720 students (62.8%) chose new/dierent furniture, while the number of students choosing private study spaces and desktop computers were 687 (62.2%) and 230 (20.1%) respectively. 155 students (13.5%) indicated they would like to see more of other things in their housing, most frequently noted were a printer (n=31) and kitchen appliances, tools, and supplies (n=18)

Interview Main Takeaways:

Policy enforcement: Every RA is equipped with progressive discipline expectations. Typically the rule violations that are perceived as ‘most annoying’ are the most difficult to enforce for RAs (ie. Quiet Hours, Sports in the Hallways).
Cottage Application Process: In the past, cottages residents were determined by the RA of each cottage. However, as of this year, students seeking a cottage residence have the opportunity to apply with a group of students to live in a cottage under the residency of an RA of a neighboring cottage.

Recommendation Overview:

Partner with Campus Ministries to discuss the best way to serve students in their spiritual growth through residency at Hope.
Continue increasing access to cottage/apartment housing opportunities without direct selection by the residing RA.
Continue developing an inventory as to what each cottage provides and strive for consistency among each residence.
Think creatively about how to provide more information about cottages/floor plans for students.

Download the full Spring 20123 Residential Life & Housing Assessment Report

Executive Summary

Semester: Fall 2023
Department: Van Wylen Library
Interim Dean of the Library: Todd Wiebe
Assistant Director: Jessica Hronchek
Chief of Assessment: Eric Alsgaard

Most Significant Data Points:

Overall, students are satisfied with the Van Wylen Library with 956 students (83.3%) indicating they are “Satisfied” or “Very Satisfied” with the Van Wylen Library’s study spaces including virtual and collaborative spaces and overall environment. No respondents indicated they were “Very Dissatisfied” with the Van Wylen Library.
Students indicate that the Van Wylen Library has accessible and clearly advertised resources (mean = 4.19/5.00). There is less agreement that the library has directly contributed to student's academic success (mean = 3.75) and that the Van Wylen Library assisted students in developing their critical thinking skills related to online and physical text (mean = 3.49).
Students feel the library has adequate online and physical resources, with 87.3% of students indicating “Agree” or “Strongly Agree.” Those who selected “Disagree” or “Strongly Disagree” were asked which resources should be improved. Students (n = 29) indicate that Print Resources (55.2% of respondents) and Online Resources (41.4% of respondents) need the most updating and improvement.
Students were provided with an opportunity to submit additional written comments regarding their experiences with Van Wylen Library. Of the 142 valid responses, the most commonly noted items were library resources and the library as a resource (26.0%), the need for upgrading and renovation (24.6%), and study rooms (23.2%), and an overall student sentiment of satisfaction with the Van Wylen Library.

Interview Main Takeaways:

Library as a study space: Despite student data indicating a need to be, Van Wylen Library’s staff and students alike agree that the library is not currently the ideal study space on campus. The physical space of the library does not have enough group study spaces to facilitate abundant group study, nor does it provide enough individual study spaces. The sta believes this could be improved with a renovation plan supplying additional furniture and improvements to the physical space.
Need for renovation: Originally built in 1988 and scarcely renovated since, the library staff has frequently investigated renovation plans. In collaboration with the director of Physical Plant and the Oce of Philanthropy, rough plans have been made for new furniture quotes and preliminary architectural plans. Van Wylen Library’s Head of Collection also expressed willingness to relocate bookshelf space given appropriate need to do so.

Recommendation Overview*:
* Full recommendations and suggestions found in Section 6.

In response to the student priority found within the data, work to develop and implement a renovation plan for the library’s physical space to improve the overall quality of studying in the library.
Investigate volume-reduction methods for implementation in the library’s third and fourth floors. This should include involvement of students and Physical Plant.
Work with faculty to emphasize the value and availability of library resources to increase visibility and identify potential gaps in critical thinking education.

Download the full Fall 2023 Van Wylen Library Assessment Report