Carleton College Prefect Program

1. Carleton CollegePrefect Program Data Analysis: 2004- Spring 2006 Shannon Carcelli

2. The Data Measurement • Each student who visits a prefect session is counted on a sign-in sheet. • Prefects who turn in these attendance records (usually about 50-70% of prefects, but it’s hard to be sure without looking at the actual numbers of sessions that meet each term) add their data to an ever-growing database that measures students’ attendance at prefect sessions. • Along with a student’s attendance record, we record the student’s gender, class year, major, and whether or not the student attended the first or second session in any given class.

3. Example of Make-up of Database: Dummy variable: 1 means “yes,” 0 means “no”

4. Major Findings: • Data on 59 classes--involving 38 prefects, 33 professors, and about 1,481 students--have been collected and analyzed. • 948 students (64.21% of students taking classes with prefects) have attended a prefect session at least once from 2004 to 2006. • The average student who attended a prefect session for a class attended 4.27 sessions for that class. • Overall, from 2004 to 2006, there were 6,270 visits to prefect sessions. This does not include one-on-one tutoring sessions, nor does it include the many visits to the sessions of prefects who did not turn in their attendance records.

5. By Academic Department: • 51.57% of biology students attended prefect sessions, available in both Biology 125 and Biology 126. • 65.62% of chemistry students attended sessions, in Chemistry 123, 128, 230, 233, and 234. • 75.58% of computer science students attended sessions, in Computer Science 117 and 127. • 70.20% of economics students attended sessions, in Economics 110 and 111. • 67.42% of psychology students attended sessions in Psychology 110 and 124.

6. Gender Breakdown- Men: • 56.62% of men who had the resource available attended at least one prefect session. • 18.51% of men attended at least 31% (or five) of their classes’ prefect sessions. • 4.36% of men attended at least 63% (or ten) of their classes’ prefect sessions. • 17.15% of men attended their classes’ first and/or second session.

7. Gender Breakdown- Men: • Men were 3.56% more likely to attend a prefect session led by a female prefect. • They were 7.90% more likely to attend 31% (or five) of prefect sessions if sessions were led by a female prefect. • Men were 3.86% more likely to attend 63% (or ten) of prefect sessions if sessions were led by a female prefect. • However, men were 1.11% more likely to attend the first or second session if the sessions were led by a male prefect.

8. Gender Breakdown- Men:

9. Gender Breakdown- Women: • 69.13% of women who had the resource available attended at least one prefect session. • 30.52% of women attended at least 31% (or five) of available sessions. • 9.32% of women attended at least 63% (or ten) of available sessions. • 30.96% of women attended the first or second session offered.

10. Gender Breakdown- Women: • Women were 12.58% more likely to attend a session led by a male prefect. • They were 18.66% more likely to attend 31% (or five) of sessions if sessions were led by a male prefect. • Women were 16.59% more likely to attend 63% (or ten) of sessions if sessions were led by a male prefect. • They were 22.91% more likely to attend the first and/or second session if they were led by a male prefect.

11. Gender Breakdown- Women:

12. Gender and Attendance- Overall Trends: • Of the 59 classes for which data were available, 30 (or 50.85%) had male prefects and 29 (or 49.15%) had female prefects. • Overall, students were 8.43% more likely to attend a prefect session led by a prefect of the opposite sex. • They were 14.35% more likely to attend 31% of sessions, 12.24% more likely to attend 63% of sessions and 13.89% more likely to attend the first or second session when the sessions were led by a prefect of the opposite sex. • This trend is much more apparent with women, although it is visible with men as well.

13. Gender and Attendance- Overall Trends:

14. More Questions to be Answered: • First impressions: Why were men more likely to attend the first few sessions led by male prefects, but more likely to continue attending sessions when they were led by women? • Survey Suggestion: Do students consciously choose to attend more sessions led by a prefect of the opposite sex? • Gender Stereotypes: More men tend to prefect for economics classes, and more women tend to prefect for psychology classes. Is it possible that male students simply feel less secure about their knowledge in psychology (a less stereotypically “male” discipline than economics) and therefore attend more sessions in order to obtain the extra help they think they need (and vice versa for women in economics)?

15. Sources of Error: • Because not all prefects turned in their sign-in sheet data, everything measured paints an incomplete picture of the reality of prefect session attendance. • In analyzing these data, we worked closely with the registrar’s office to gather class sizes and gender breakdowns– information that was essential for our records and analysis. Although communication between the Academic Support Center and the registrar’s office has historically been good, there have been a few errors or miscommunications caught, and there could potentially be more. • Lately, there have been more and more data that do not make sense, cannot be true, and remain unexplained. For example, according to the prefects’ sign-in sheets and information collected from the registrar’s office, there were at least four classes in 2005-2006 in which more women attended prefect sessions than were actually registered for the class. The best way to fix questionable data such as these is to be sure that the class lists that the prefects use are the same as the class lists that the registrar has. • Some of the names on some of the sign-in sheets are questionable. Did Francis Scott Key really take Econ 111 at Carleton College?

16. Suggestions for Improvement of Data: • The best and easiest way to ensure that our data remain presentable and indicative of the actual facts of the program is to improve communication between students, prefects, professors, the Academic Support Center and the registrar’s office. • Professors need to supply students with a class list, both before the class begins and after the drop-add period ends. If this is an understood expectation, not only will it make for cleaner data, it will also improve prefect-professor communication (because it will open channels and allow for exchange of information at a vital time in the term: when students are thinking about dropping the class), and it will make it easier for the prefect to begin getting to know the students (I personally know what a barrier it is not to have a class list at your first session!).

17. Options for Class Lists: • Best-Case Scenario: Professors would supply students with an electronic copy of an Excel spreadsheet of the class at the beginning of the term. Ideally, this spreadsheet would have the names of all students in the class and on the waitlist going down the left side. If the information is at the professor’s disposal, it would be really ideal for the spreadsheet to include the gender, class year, and/or major of every student as well. If all this is not possible, it would be sufficient for prefects to simply receive a list of students in the class, as long it includes those on the waitlist and as long as prefects receive and updated class list after the drop-add period.

18. Example of What Data Analysts Would Love to See on Excel Sheets from Prefects: