Counseling-Enhanced Developmental Learning Communities and Student Success

1. Counseling-Enhanced Developmental Learning Communities and Student Success Skagit Valley College 2008 PNW Higher Education Teaching & Learning Conference Spokane, WA

2. 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

3. 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

4. Learning Communities at SVC

5. 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

6. 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)

7. 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

8. Background: Research and Data Related to Learning Communities

9. Research Literature: Tinto (1998) • Lessons Learned • Making pedagogical choices: Different strategies for different needs • Making appropriate placement: Assessing student education needs • Lessons in Implementation • Using pilot programs • Building institutional support • Building faculty and staff involvement

10. 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.”

11. 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

12. 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.

13. 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: • I have done • I plan to do • I have not done nor plan to do

14. 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)

15. 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”)

18. 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.

20. 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%.

21. Counseling-Enhanced Developmental Learning Communities:Overview

22. 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

23. Skagit Learning Communities:Core Pedagogical Practices • 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.

24. Project Goals • 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

25. 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

26. 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

27. 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.

28. 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

29. 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 re-visited and compared to “reality” • Students meet in small groups three weeks into the quarter and discuss what strategies they tried and what worked

30. 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

31. 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.

32. 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.”

33. Counseling-Enhanced Developmental Learning Communities:Pilot Project Research & Results

34. 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?

35. 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 stand-alone developmental education courses • Group IV = Fast Track success skills course offered prior to Fall quarter

36. 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

37. Age Ethnicity Gender First generation Prior education level Work status Family status Ed Intent Program (Major) GPA (entry and progress) College credits completed at time of entry Full-time vs. part-time status Year of high school graduation Placement test scores Demographic Variables

38. Demographics

39. Demographics

40. Results – Fall Quarter Cohort

41. Percent Earning a C or Better

42. Fall to Winter Retention

43. 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

44. 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

45. 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

46. 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

47. Questions??? Time to Fly

48. 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, College-Level 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.