Honors College Council

Voting members present: Michael Burand, Kathryn McIntosh, Sam Logan, Jessica Fujinaga, Adam Gross, Marina Ketrenos, Jen Martin, Sahana Shah
Voting members absent: Sandy Neubaum, Hilary Boudet, Bo Sun, David Cann, Demian Hommel
Ex–Officio members present: Toni Doolen – Honors College
Guests present: Kasena Hillman, Susan Rodgers

Summary of Retention Support Strategies Implemented by Honors College Advising for Honors Students

• Kasena is the head advisor and has been with the Honors College for 10 years.
• At the end of the last meeting, a very good question was asked about students who are admitted through the petition process versus those who meet the minimum requirements and what resources are in place to support them.
  • Those students are not necessarily tracked.
  • It was a good question for how the Honors College (HC) supports retention and completion for honors students, so Kasena was asked to give an overview of what that looks like.
    • Advisors look at students in the HC across their entire honors career.
    • This considers the diverse paths of students.
    • It includes identifiers of those at risk and encourages continued engagement.
    • It's designed to create targeted messages rather than sending every student the same reminders.
    • Communications are sent through emails from a variety of honors staff and through texts and other methods.
    • Each outreach includes a direct link to a student's academic advisor in case they'd like to schedule or have a follow-up conversation.
    • Advisors may outreach to provide resources to ensure success, and some may or may not ask for a response.
    • Students who may be at risk are often students in their first year with the HC and those with low HC course engagement.
    • It's important to note that the term "transfer student" is used differently in the HC to refer to students who come from another college or university or who have been at OSU but not in the Honors College.
      • Anyone coming to the Honors College who hasn't been in the Honors College since starting at OSU is called a transfer student.
    • Some examples of communications sent out include resources and reminders for graduation, commencement information, and important thesis deadlines.
    • HC reach out if a student intends to graduate in the next year but doesn't have a thesis advisor yet.
    • Academic advisors and support staff lead in communicating with students.
      • There were more details and examples in the handouts given out to the Honors College Council (HCC) members.
        • Student members were asked what they preferred: email or text?
          • “It depends on the message, but I usually prefer email since I leave things in my inbox until I've reviewed them, but if it's a text message, I'll usually forget I got a message.”
            • Noted that students can opt out of texting.
            • FERPA makes things a little hard when it comes to texting.
            • Students at another university found texting was more effective than email due to the mass income of emails.
          • “I think it's helpful to see the text since it reminds me to check on something. I like to keep school things centered on my email.”
          • “I prefer email usually, because I'll swipe away a text and maybe forget about it.”
          • “I think being an older student, I have a preference for the email rather than texting world.”
          • “I prefer email since I'm off my phone most of the school day, so I'd only check at the end of the day.”

Presentation of Demographic Data on Current Honors College Students Who Did Not Meet Minimum Admission Criteria and Were Admitted to the Honors College via the Allowance Created for AY2022

• In 2021, the HC offered the option for students to apply to the Honors College without meeting the minimum requirements.
  • If a student has one of the minimum requirements, they're eligible to apply.
  • The HC noticed many students had difficulty during COVID and saw that as an opportunity to allow students to apply without meeting the minimum requirement and ask them to provide the reason why their application doesn't meet the full requirements.
  • The majority apply as first year or transfer students while applying to OSU.
  • Students can also apply directly to the HC as internal transfer students who've been at OSU already but haven't applied yet.
  • The application review process is holistic.
  • Everything is compiled and reviewed by staff and/or admissions committee members.
  • HC checked that applicants wrote their essay correctly and have completed their application materials, including the Common App application, transcripts, test scores, and short answer questions.
  • A person reads every single application—at least one person and often two.
  • The number of recorded applications has just been updated but does not include internal transfer students.
  • In 2023, HC had 1,907 applicants and exceeded its goal of 1,800.
  • In 2021, students were admitted whose applications for some reason did not meet the minimum requirements.
    • Data for students who barely met and didn't meet the minimum have been compiled.
      • 71% withdrawal rate for this group
      • in 2021, there are students who were admitted and are still here.
      • In 2022 and 2023, more students were admitted.
        • The average GPA from the group of students who wouldn't have been accepted without the admissions process is 3.45, and 15 students have a 4.0 GPA.
        • From the group admitted in 2021, there is one student planning to defend a thesis in the spring.
        • There's no minimum GPA to remain in Honors College, just one to let you graduate with an Honors Baccalaureate degree.
      • There are intervention methods in place.
        • If a student can't meet the minimum GPA by the time of graduation, they must come to the HC dean for an exception.
        • Students will get outreach if they fall below a 3.5 GPA, but it's their choice to stay enrolled in Honors College.
      • 13% of applicants with high need levels were below the minimum requirements.
        • This is based on the FAFSA data.
        • Students below the minimum are usually more ethnically and racially diverse, tend to skew toward first gen, and have slightly more male identifying students—OSU still only offers just two gender options.
        • There are some students who had a 1.0 GPA a long time ago and came back later, but that 1.0 GPA is impacting their current one.
  • It's a significant advantage for transfer students that this process is offered.
  • For high school students, having an opportunity to express their circumstances is important – usually special circumstances are significant – death of parents, homelessness, illness – so, with the process, they still have an opportunity to apply.
  • Comments from members unable to attend:
    • Sandy:
      • When asked if we should allow students who don't meet the minimum application requirements to pursue a petition process, I approve.
      • Remember there are three options: to officialize the process, to extend it for another year, or to remove it.
      • If more time is needed to decide, I'm in support of option B, to extend the program.
      • I don't support option C; students should have the opportunity to appeal.
    • Demian:
      • I'm in favor, but I believe I could be dissuaded.
      • I believe students post-COVID still have potential to be successful.
    • David:
      • I'm okay with any of the options. I don't feel strongly toward any option.
      • To an extent, I advocate to extend the process as I'd like to see more data on students who applied through the minimum requirements.
      • I feel there's not enough data to show a conclusive analysis.
      • Maybe in a few years we'll have enough data.
  • The HCC is leaning towards approving or extending, rather than eliminating, but feel if they extend, they should extend for 5 years to collect more data.

Action: Michael Burand moved to end discussion; seconded.

Action: Motion to approve the process to allow students who do not meet either minimum requirement to still apply for admissions, subject to the holistic admissions review process; seconded. Motion passed with 8 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

Review and Discuss the Proposed Revisions to Academic Regulations 26, 27 and 28

• Regarding the proposed revisions to AR 26, 27, and 28, the HC has no concerns regarding the revisions.

Anything Else?

• No other business.