Transcript Counseling-Enhanced Dev LCs

Counseling-Enhanced
Developmental Learning
Communities and
Student Success
Skagit Valley College
2008 PNW Higher Education
Teaching & Learning Conference
Spokane, WA
Session Topics
 Learning
Communities at SVC
 Literature/data behind the pilot project
 Overview of project
 Course and assignment design
 Research design
 Results to date
 Feedback and continuous improvement
 Faculty perspectives
Session Topics
 Learning
Communities at Skagit Valley
College
 Developmental Learning Communities

Research and Data
 Project


Overview
Planning, Goals,
Integrated Assignment Example
 Research
Design
 Results to date
Learning
Communities at
SVC
Learning Communities at SVC
 Curricular
Learning Communities have
been offered at Skagit since 1986 and
required for the transfer degree since 1993
 Approximately 50-60 LCs are offered at
SVC each year, about half are fully
collaborative
 Student outcomes: develop/deepen an
understanding of the connections among
disciplines and, for composition LCs, to
support development of academic writing
Learning Communities at SVC
 Fully



Collaborative
Feast or Famine (Nutrition and Sociology)
Sex.comm (Human Sexuality and Mass
Communication)
Stating the Matter (Chemistry and English
Composition)
 Developmental

(federated, co-enrollment)
Reading Between the Numbers (developmental
Math and Reading)
Learning Communities at SVC
 Federated


Celluloid Science - science majors enroll in an
introductory film course and one of the
courses required for their major , with the
explicit purpose of exploring how films portray
scientists, scientific practices, and concepts
This, That, and the Other - students co-enroll
in a research paper course and one of several
social science courses, with the goal of
researching topics specific to their field of
study
Background:
Research and Data Related to
Learning Communities
Research Literature:
Tinto (1998)
 Lessons


Making pedagogical choices: Different
strategies for different needs
Making appropriate placement: Assessing
student education needs
 Lessons



Learned
in Implementation
Using pilot programs
Building institutional support
Building faculty and staff involvement
Research Literature:
Malnarich with others (2003)
“Students need to develop the
abilities associated with “learning how
to learn” in multiple and varied
contexts—a key learning goal of
curriculum aimed at preparing
students for college-level work.”
Research Literature:
Malnarich with others (2003)
 Best




Practices
Adopt an abilities-based developmental
perspective in LCs and throughout the
campus
Target high-risk courses
Integrate skill development with credit-bearing
college-level courses
Design a holistic program – integrate
academic and student support services; use
peer tutors
College-Level Data

Numerous studies conducted over the past 20
years regarding LCs at Skagit (see Dunlap &
Pettitt, 2008)
 CCSSE results in 2003, 2005 and 2007
validated the value of Learning Communities:
students who took learning communities at SVC
were significantly more likely to engage in
activities that increase their time on task (and
thus their chances for meeting their educational
goals) as well as to assume responsibility for
their learning.
CCSSE LC Question



Stem: “Which of the following have you
done, are you doing, or do you plan to do
while attending this college?”
Category: “Organized learning communities
(linked courses/study groups led by faculty
or counselors)”
Response Categories:
1.
2.
3.
I have done
I plan to do
I have not done nor plan to do
Method
 Used
T-test for independent samples to
examine differences in effort and
engagement between students who had
taken Learning Communities and those
who had not done nor planned to do.
 Results are for the latest survey
administration (Spring 2007)
Findings
Prompt: “In your experiences at this college during the
current school year, about how often have you done each of
the following?”
Responses range from 1 (“Never”) to 4 (“Very Often”)
Learning Community
Variable
Asked questions in class
or contributed to class
discussions
Made a class
presentation
Have
Taken
(n = 173 )
Not
Taken
(n = 232)
Sig.
3.00
3.00
1.000
2.43
2.27
.069
Learning Community
Variable
Prepared two or more drafts of a
paper or assignment before
turning it in
Worked on a paper or project that
required integrating ideas or
information from various sources
Have Taken
(n = 173 )
Not Taken
(n = 232)
Sig.
2.96
2.45
.000
.000
3.14
2.75
Worked with other students on
projects during class
2.88
2.69
.021
Worked with classmates outside
of class to prepare class
assignments
2.49
2.10
.000
2.87
2.69
.038
Discussed ideas from your
readings or classes with others
outside of class (students, family
members, co-workers, etc.)
Learning Community
Variable
Sig.
Have Taken
(n = 173 )
Not Taken
(n = 232)
Worked harder than you thought
you could to meet an instructor’s
standards or expectations
2.78
2.52
.003
Used email to communicate with
an instructor
3.10
2.67
.000
Discussed grades or assignments
with an instructor
2.76
2.58
.039
Discussed ideas from your
readings or classes with
instructors outside of class
2.11
1.88
.012
Worked with instructors on
activities other than coursework
1.74
1.45
.000
CCSSE Benchmarks

Five benchmarks - 38 engagement items that
“reflect the most important aspects of the
student experience”
 Rolling three year cohort (2005 – 2007)
 Benchmark scores are




computed by averaging the scores on survey items
that comprise the benchmark
weighted for full-time/part-time attendance
standardized so that weighted mean scores across all
students is 50
An institutions’ benchmark scores are computed
by taking the weighted average of their students’
standardized scores.
60
58.3
58
56.6
56
53.0
54
53.7
52.1
52
50
50.1
49.7
50.1
49.9
Academic
Challenge
Stu-Fac
Interaction
49.6
48
46
44
Active &
Student Effort
Collaborative
Learning
SVC
Medium Colleges
Support for
Learners
All Colleges
Imperatives
 Approximately
half of students new to the
college test into developmental English
 Nearly 90% test into developmental math
 The “C or better” pass rate in
developmental math (as a percent of
students enrolled the 10th day) averages
65%.
Counseling-Enhanced
Developmental Learning
Communities:
Overview
Project Planning
 Summer
2007 meeting at The Washington
Center for the Improvement of
Undergraduate Education, sponsored by
MDRC
 Faculty and IR, joined by additional faculty
and administrators for part of the time
 Collaboratively 1) identified core
pedagogical practices, 2) planned
common counseling activities, and 3)
identified key research components
Skagit Learning Communities:
Core Pedagogical Practices
1.
2.
3.
Value and build on students’ existing
abilities and experiences.
Create ongoing opportunities to
collaboratively construct knowledge
together in class.
Ensure active involvement in learning,
i.e., solving problems, discussing ideas,
writing, working on project teams.
Project Goals
1.
2.
3.
Expand our developmental Learning
Community offerings to improve
student success in Mathematics and
English
Integrate student services with
instruction to increase collaboration
and to enhance faculty advising skills
Use a research model to plan and to
measure success
Counseling Component
 Four
advising-related topics are integrated
into the LC:




Time Management
Study Skills (note taking; test preparation,
etc.)
Educational Planning
College Resources
 Topics
are integrated organically, based on
the syllabus and student needs
Example
Reading Between the Numbers
 MATH 96 and READ 97
 Integrative
assignment topic = Time
Management
 Math, Reading, and Counseling faculty
work collaboratively with students in this
Learning Community on this assignment
Time Management Assignment
 Integration

Students combine their past experiences and
mathematics principles to assess their current
schedule. Instructor-selected reading
provides them an opportunity to discover
solutions and likely pitfalls. Students write a
summary paper integrating these skills and
knowledge.
Time Management Assignment
 Students
use their own experience and
expertise to complete a questionnaire
about the amount of time they think they
spend each week on a variety of activities,
and then calculate totals
 Instructors help students to calculate
percentages and fractions, and to discuss
any issues that come up
 Students keep an activity log throughout
the next week; logs are reviewed daily by
instructors
Time Management Assignment
 Students
read about time management in
faculty-selected texts or articles for ideas
about improving their time management
skills
 After they have tracked the use of their
time for a week, the questionnaire is revisited and compared to “reality”
 Students meet in small groups three
weeks into the quarter and discuss what
strategies they tried and what worked
Time Management
Assignment…. still going
 Each
student writes a summary paper
discussing issues that they see with their
current schedule and what strategies they
may use for better time management
 All the student summary papers are
collected. Faculty compile the papers into
a book (without names) and give a copy to
all students in the class
Building on Core Practices
1. Value and build on students’ existing
abilities and experiences.
Students use their own experience as a
starting point with the questionnaire and
will also use their past knowledge when
reading the literature to appropriately
choose solutions that will work for them.
Building on Core Practices
2. Create ongoing opportunities to collaboratively
construct knowledge together in class.
3. Ensure active involvement in learning,
i.e. solving problems, discussing ideas,
writing, working on project teams.
The assignment involves learning through
writing, small group work, solving problems, and
discussions. It also has reflection components in
the summary paper and the re-visit later in the
quarter. Their work is made “public.”
Counseling-Enhanced
Developmental Learning
Communities:
Pilot Project Research & Results
Research Question
Does the addition of a counseling faculty
member into the developmental learning
community help students be more
successful in the course and in their future
educational efforts?
Independent Variable:
Course Pedagogy
 Nine
developmental learning communities
offered in 2007-08, divided into two groups:


Group I = counseling-enhanced developmental
learning communities
Group II = “regular” (non-counseling-enhanced)
developmental learning communities
 Group
III = selected, comparable standalone developmental education courses
 Group IV = Fast Track success skills course
offered prior to Fall quarter
Dependent Variable:
Student Achievement
 The
dependent variable in this study is
student achievement, measured using the
following factors:
1. Student success in the core course(s)
(English and/or Math)
2. Student success in subsequent core course
sequence
3. Student retention from quarter to quarter
4. Student persistence to degree or certificate
Demographic Variables
 Age
 GPA (entry
 Ethnicity
progress)
 College credits
completed at time of
entry
 Full-time vs. part-time
status
 Year of high school
graduation
 Placement test scores
 Gender
 First
generation
 Prior education
level
 Work status
 Family status
 Ed Intent
 Program (Major)
and
Demographics
100%
80%
C-E LC
60%
LC
40%
StandAlone
20%
FastTrack
Workforce
Intent
Transfer
Intent
White
Female
0%
Demographics
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
C-E LC
Employed
Part-Time
Enrolled
Full-Time
No
Dependents
LC
StandAlone
FastTrack
Results – Fall Quarter Cohort
Percent Earning a C or Better
MATH 96
READ 97
MATH 96
ENGL 07
MATH 97
SPCH 100
MATH 96
MATH 97
47%
59%
52%
67%
56%
60%
55%
64%
ENGL 97
CSS 103
54%
100%
Fall to Winter Retention
Fast Track
Stand Alone
81%
74%
Dev LC
76%
C-E Dev LC
70%
82%
75%
80%
85%
Strengthening Collaboration:
Counseling and Teaching Faculty
 Collaboratively
design and teach
developmental learning communities
 Collaboratively assess our efforts
frequently to measure student success
and guide future ventures
 Meet with all LC teams to discuss
successes and challenges
Strengthening Collaboration:
Student Services and Instruction

Build capacity by expanding participation in our
learning community planning
 Rotate counselors into the counselor membership
position of the LC advisory committee
 Regularize meetings between the LC advisory
committee and counseling faculty and staff to:




Capture multiple perspectives and share enthusiasm
Plan for student needs
Review Learning Community proposals
Identify concerns and issues
Continuous Improvement
 Fall
and Winter teams met mid-quarter to
discuss progress and make adjustments
 Debriefing sessions held at the end of
each quarter with all participating faculty to
identify successes and challenges, and to
review data
 Disseminate successful strategies and
results with the college community through
Center for Learning and Teaching
And speaking of time
management…
 Thanks
to The Washington Center for the
Improvement of Undergraduate Education
at The Evergreen State College (WA) and
to MDRC for their continuing support of
Skagit’s faculty and administrators in our
quest to continuously improve student
success through Learning Communities
Questions???
Time to Fly
References
Dunlap, L., & Pettitt, M (2008). “Assessing Student
Outcomes in Learning Communities: Two Decades
of Studies at a Community College.” Journal of
Applied Research in the Community College, 15(2).
 Malnarich, G., et al. (2003). The Pedagogy of
Possibilities: Developmental Education, CollegeLevel Studies, and Learning Communities. NLCP
Monograph Series. Olympia, WA: The Evergreen
State College.
 Tinto, V. (January, 1998). Learning Communities
and the Reconstruction of Remedial Education in
Higher Education. Paper presented at the
conference on Replacing Remediation in Higher
Education, Palo Alto, CA.
