The AP Challenge

1. Student Self-Perceptions Prior to Intervention at the University of Virginia Dean L. Stevenson Virginia Tech Research Performed at the University of Virginia The AP Challenge

2. Program to assist talented minority and low-income students from Virginia Beach Public Schools • Based on increasing access to challenging curriculum, but also providing support for succeeding in these difficult courses • Four year study including six high schools • Two years with three experimental high schools, three control high schools • In the two subsequent years, the control groups become experimental high schools • Program includes • Intervention program at the University of Virginia (UVA) • Teacher and counselor training • Additional support systems for students Background on the AP Challenge

3. Research shows that family support can have a larger influence on student achievement than actual school characteristics (Bennett et al 2004) • More specifically, school-related discussions with high school students “…significantly increased students’ likelihood of going to college” (Gándara, 2004) • Combining these two findings, one hypothesizes that verbal family support is an important factor in student achievement and motivation • Verbal family support includes: • Reading to/with children • “Dinner table” discussions • Parents communicating high educational expectations • Help with homework • Positive attitudes and behaviors that support academic achievement Background on Family Support

4. Do students who engage in more at-home, school-related discussions seem to have higher academic supports, motivations, and self-perceptions? • To attempt to answer this question, survey results were used: • Survey based on previous literature and similar instruments (Hertberg-Davis, Callahan, and Kyburg, 2006) • Question • “How often do you have school-related discussions at home?” • Answer Choices: • Daily (6) • 2-3 times per week (5) • Weekly (4) • Twice a month (3) • Monthly (2) • Rarely (1) • Never (0) • Students were compared in two groups: "Frequent” (Answered 5-6 on the question; 17 students) and “Rare” (Answered 0-4 on the question; 20 students) Research Question and Methodology

5. Findings: Academic Supports • Student answers were coded 0 = Not Helpful and 1 = Helpful • No significant differences between groups The p-value for all significance testing was 0.05

6. C.C.=College credit; I.C.A.=Increase my chances of admission to college; O.G.E.=Opportunity to graduate college earlier; P.W.G.=Potential for weighted grades; P.C.W.=Preparation for college work; S.M.=Save money on tuition; C.P.L.=Chance to be with people who learn like I do; C.H.S.=Courses available at my high school; D.E.C.=Deeper exploration of content; and M.C.C.=More challenging curriculum Findings: Student Motivations

7. No statistical differences between the two groups • Positive Self Image: • I feel good about myself • I am able to do things as well as other people • I am satisfied with myself • If I work really hard, I will do well at school • Negative Self Image: • I certainly feel useless at times • At times I think I am no good at all • I feel like I do not have much to be proud of • Every time I try to get ahead, somebody or something stops me Findings: Perception of Themselves and their Academic Ability

8. Students who have frequent school discussions at home perceive better treatment by their teachers* Findings: Self-Perceptions of Teacher Treatment in the Classroom • Negative Treatment: • Call on you less frequently than other students • Give you less time to respond when called on than other students • Give you less praise for participation than other students • Give you less positive attention than other students • Give you the answer instead of helping you to solve the problem • Positive Treatment: • Call on you more frequently than other students* • Give you more time to respond when called on than other students • Give you more praise for participation than other students* • Give you more positive attention than other students • Give you excellent feedback that helps you do better on tests, on projects, etc.

9. Conclusions • Students show no significant statistical differences in their academic support systems or motivations • Significant differences were not found in self-perceptions except between the two groups when considering how they are treated in the classroom by their teachers • Cannot put a direction on the finding • Future Research • Extent of family support and its effect on other educational factors • More comprehensive survey • Compare groups with high family support and differing levels of self-esteem or high and impact on student achievement • Correlation between treatment in the classroom and frequency of at home conversations Conclusions and Future Research

10. Professor Mentors: • Dr. Carolyn Callahan • Dr. Holly Hertberg-Davis • Graduate Mentors: • Rob “Bobert” Izzo • Lynne Crotts • Entire SURP Coordination Staff • Student Partner: • Mary Nguyen Acknowledgements

11. Bennett, A., Bridglall, B.L., Cauce, A.M., Everson, H.T., Gordon, E.W., Lee, C.D. et al (2004). All Students Reaching the Top: Strategies for Closing Academic Achievement Gaps. Illinois: Learning Point Associates College Board (2006). National Summary Report 2005. Retrieved July 21, 2009, from http://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/ap/exgrd_sum/2005.html Gándara, P. (2004). Latino Achievement: Identifying Models That Foster Success. The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. Hertberg-Davis, H., Callahan, C.M., & Vyborg, R.M. (2006). Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate Programs: A “Fit” for Gifted Learners? The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. References