Transcript Document

Advising At-Risk Students:
An Early Warning Effort
Phil Warsaba, Student Academic Success Centre (SASC)
CACUSS 2007 – Building Bridges
Student Academic Success Centre
 Carleton University’s centralized academic
advising and learning support office.
 Composed of 3 offices: Academic Advising
Centre, Learning Support Services, and PeerAssisted Study Sessions.
2
Academic Advising Centre Staff
 The unit is staffed by:
–
–
–
–
–
Manager
8 F/T Academic Advisors
2 P/T Academic Advisors
Administrative Assistant
3-5 P/T students
3
SASC’s Mandate
 The SASC mission is to help students build a
foundation for academic success through the
provision of programs and services that foster
personal direction and academic competence.
 The Student Academic Success Centre was
established to:
– Improve the university’s retention and graduation rates;
– Enhance the undergraduate university experience,
particularly in the first and second years;
– Ensure the academic success of students.
4
The Role of Academic Advisors
 Help students understand academic rules and
regulations.
 Unravel the mysteries of the audit, CGPA
calculation, requirements for graduation, etc.
 Assist students with the development of effective
study skills and strategies for academic success.
 Guide students through academic difficulties they
may be facing.
5
Approach to Students
 Focus on students and on their (individual) on-going
needs over an extended period of time. One advising
session builds upon another.
 Students are viewed as partners who are actively
engaged in intellectual and personal growth.
 Help students think about and articulate what is
important to them in their academic and personal lives.
 Set short-term as well as long-term goals, discuss
ways to achieve those goals, and help the student
monitor progress in fulfilling those goals.
6
Academic Improvement Planning
 A significant number of students that meet with
Advisors at SASC are on AW, SUS, DEB, or ITR.
 Students with negative Academic Performance
Evaluations (APEs) meet with Advisors to develop
an Academic improvement Plan (AIP).
7
Commitment to Student Success
 SASC is committed to:
– Guiding students through the challenges that
are impeding their ability to succeed, AND;
– Identifying students who are at risk of academic
difficulty and addressing potential problems
before they arise.
8
Academic Outreach
 SASC currently provides the following services for atrisk or potential at-risk groups:
– Academic Improvement Planning (AIP) sessions for students on
Academic Warning;
– Varsity athlete workshops and one-on-one advising;
– Aboriginal programming;
– First Year Information (FYI) in-class workshops for FYSM students;
– direct referral for students with disabilities;
– Intervention advising for first-year students who have withdrawn
from 1.0 or more credits in their first term of study;
– Intervention advising for first-year students who have received a No
Decision standing;
– Intervention advising for upper-year undeclared students;
– Intervention advising for students with multiple exam and/or
assignment deferrals;
9
University Indicators of Academic Difficulty
 Course success rates are used to identify
traditionally difficult classes at the university.
 High DFW rates have been associated with higher
attrition rates.
 Deans and Associate Deans have been tasked
with the challenge of improving course success
rates in their respective Faculties.
10
The Need for a New Early Warning
Initiative
 Faculty members identified class attendance as a
systematic problem.
 Students were found to be unaware of basic rules
and regulations.
 Feedback being provided to students too late to
effect any significant change.
11
A Model for Change
 Re-Engagement Through Academic Intervention
Now (RETAIN) program at Marymount College
(Palos Verdes, CA).
 Joe Cuseo’s (2003) research on Early-Alert
(Warning) Systems.
 Tinto’s (1993) research on the causes and cures
of student attrition.
12
Proposal for an Early Warning Initiative
(EWI) at Carleton
 In late January, 2007, SASC distributed a
preliminary proposal for a new EWI.
 Faculty of Engineering demonstrated immediate
interest.
 SASC agreed to conduct a small-scale pilot
project to assist ENG with 5 traditionally difficult
courses.
13
Structure of the EWI Pilot Project
 ENG identified 5 courses (1 first-year, 3 secondyear, and 1 third-year) with high DFW rates.
 Professors were asked to assess the performance
of students in the following areas:
– Attendance (class and labs)
– Assignments
– Practical exams
14
Structure of the EWI Pilot Project
 A list of 59 students was sent to SASC for follow-up
between the 3rd and 6th week of the course (pre-midterm).
 Advisors conducted a condensed performance evaluation
for each student.
 Students were first contacted by phone (2 attempts) or
sent an email.
 The importance of class attendance was discussed and
students were encouraged to book an AIP appointment at
SASC.
15
Response Rates
 Nearly 60% of students contacted responded to
the outreach (compared to a 7% response rate to
the Faculty outreach).
 50% of respondents subsequently met with an
Academic Advisor to develop an Academic
Improvement Plan.
 Response rates are similar to those resulting from
SASC’s outreach to students on AW.
16
Student Perceptions
 With very few exceptions, students were
genuinely pleased with the outreach.
 Many expressed surprised that the university was
aware of class absences.
 Others noted that it was the first time they felt that
someone at the university cared about their
academic success.
17
Common Explanations
 Students offered the following explanations for
their lack of engagement/poor performance in the
course:
–
–
–
–
Late registration
Intention to withdraw
Ineffective time management skills
Sense that the material covered in class was a review of
what they already knew
– Decreased motivation
– Little understanding of the relationship between attendance
and grades
18
Identifying At-Risk Students
 Of the students contacted as part of this EWI:
–
–
–
–
37% had earned 3.0 or more discredits
14% were to be Ineligible to Return (ITR)
9% were on Academic Warning
12% had deferred examinations from the Fall term
 Only 7% of the students identified by the Faculty
of Engineering were intending to withdraw from
the course they were registered in.
19
Course-Level Outcomes
 Immediate and sustained increased in class
attendance was reported for each of the 5 courses.
 Of the students who booked a follow-up AIP
appointment with an Academic Advisor, only 2 were
classified as Ineligible to Return to ENG.
 D and F rates for each of the 5 courses decreased,
while course Withdrawal rates increased.
 Increased awareness, and use of, support services.
20
University-Level Outcomes
 Increased awareness of the relationship between
attendance and academic difficulties.
 Project triggered a university-wide attendance
survey.
 Individual faculty members appreciated
collaboration and support.
21
Future Directions
 A proposal has been submitted to offer a EWI of
this kind to 10 traditionally difficult first-year
courses in the fall of 2008.
 Support of 20+ courses with low course success
rates is envisioned for 2009-2010 academic year.
22
Challenges
 Resources, resources, resources…
– The Advising Centre alone provides 10,000 individual consultations
per year.
– To be effective, a pre-midterm alert effort requires sustained contact
and follow-up on the part of Advisors.
 First-year student compliance could be an issue.
 Students identified in outreach efforts are often at the
pre-contemplation stage in the Stages of Change
model.
 Remedial perceptions of services and programs
offered.
23
Applicability
 Centralized advising is not required for Early
Warning Efforts.
 We need to foster a culture of engagement, where
attendance is emphasized.
 Advisors, Counsellors and other student service
professionals should prioritize early assessment
and guidance.
24
Enjoy the Banquet!
Thank you!
25