Advising Students in Remediation

Emily WaltersNACADA Conference

October 11, 2014

Presenter• B.S. in Elementary Education from Eastern Illinois University• Graduate student at Eastern Illinois University• M.S. in College Student Affairs (May 2015)

• Career goal: Academic Advising• Full-time employee at Lake Land College• Learning Assistance Center Specialist

Emily Walters Learning Assistance Center Specialist (217) 234-5301 ewalters@lakeland.cc.il.us 5001 Lake Land Blvd. Fax: (217) 234-5390 Mattoon, IL 61938

Outline of Presentation• Background of the Study• Purpose of the Study• Research Questions• Review of the Literature• Methodology• Results of the Study• Discussion• Higher Education• Future Research• Conclusion

Background of the Study

• President Obama’s push to educate Americans in higher education (The White House, n.d.)

• 21st Century Initiative (AACC, 2012)

• Lack of preparedness for collegiate academics (Bettinger & Long, 2005; Horn, McCoy, Campbell & Brock, 2009)

Purpose of the Study

• The purpose of this study was to determine if student success courses benefit students concurrently enrolled in remedial courses.

• Grade point average and continual enrollment in terms were used to determine student success.

Research Questions• RQ1. Do students who place into remedial reading courses

and enroll in a student success course complete more terms than students who place into a remedial reading course and do not enroll in a student success course? • Hypothesis: Students enrolled in remedial reading courses

will enroll in more terms if they also are enrolled in a student success course.

• RQ2. Do students who place into remedial reading courses and enroll in a student success course have a higher GPA than students who place into a remedial reading course and do not enroll in a student success course? • Hypothesis: Students enrolled in remedial reading will have

a higher GPA if they enroll in a student success course.

Review of the Literature

• History and role of the community college• Challenges for community colleges• Determining remedial placement• Contributing factors to student drop out rates• Remedial courses• Student success courses

History and Role of the Community College• Mission of community college • George Boggs, President and CEO of AACC, stated the

mission of the community college is to “continue to offer open, affordable access to higher education, regardless of the vagaries of the economy” (Vaughan, 2006, p. VII).

• Role of the faculty at community colleges

• Description of the typical community college student

Challenges for Community Colleges• Decline in federal, state and local funding (Crookston &

Hooks).

• Challenges of part-time faculty

• Increase number of remedial students

Determining Remedial Placement• Course placement is usually determined by a

standardized test. Typically, the ACT or SAT taken in high school or the Accuplacer or COMPASS test used by colleges (Bettinger & Long, 2005; Horn et. al., 2009).

• Increased number of students entering college with need for remedial course work

• Other ways to determine remedial placement

Contributing Factors to Student Drop Out Rates• Rate of students that drop out of four-year institutions

was 25%, but 50% for students in a two-year institution (Tuckman, 2011).

• Reasons for drop out include lack of integration, insufficient financial means, and commitments outside of school (Stovall, 1999; Tinto 1998).

• Students in remedial courses are more likely to drop out.

Remedial Courses

• Effect of remedial courses on degree/certificate completion

• Remedial courses often fall to community colleges rather than four-year institutions

• Completion of remedial work increase student success of completing a two- or four- year degree/certificate (Feely, 2011).

Student Success Courses

• Students enrolled in a success course have a higher GPA, were more connected to the institution and had greater persistence to graduation (Stovall, 1999; Stovall, 2000; Tinto, 1993; Tuckman, 2011).

Research Institution

• Midsized, Midwestern community college• District covers nearly 4,000 square miles• Population of 203,000 people in the district• College contains one main campus and 3 satellite

campuses• Includes 31 district high schools participating in dual

credit programs• The college serves 16 correctional facilities• Offers programs for direct employment, transfer

baccalaureate degrees, adult education, and special job training.

Methodology

• Quantitative study to determine if students enrolled in remedial reading courses have a higher GPA and persistence to graduation, if they are concurrently enrolled in a student success course

• Reading was chosen because of the increase of students placing into remedial reading at the research institution and the impact reading has on multiple academic coursework (Breer, 2013; Horn et. al., 2009).

Data Collection

• Data was collected from student records housed in the UI Client/Datatel program used by the institution• Separate ID numbers were used to insure confidentiality

for students• Research will follow the Family Educational Rights and

Privacy Act of 1974 (FERPA)• Under this regulation, schools may use data without

student consent provided every effort to conserve confidentiality is made (FERPA, n.d.)

Data Analysis

• Data was analyzed using SPSS© to compare the GPA and completion of terms for remedial reading students in success courses versus those that were not in a success course

• Independent t-tests were used to test the hypotheses of the research questions

Description of Courses• Essentials in Reading (RDG 009)• Middle level developmental reading course • Required course for students that have an ACT test score of 12-16 or a

COMPASS test score of 51-66 • Credit hours 2.5

• Reading and Study Skills (RDG 050)• Highest level developmental reading course • Required for students that have and ACT test score of 17-20 or a COMPASS

test score of 67-82 • Credit hours 2.5

• Strategies for Success (SFS 101)• Provides students with strategies to be successful in college and in their career • Includes curriculum about college resources, career goals, study skills, time

management, and stress/relationship skills• Elective course for all students • Required for students on Academic probation

Participants

• Students were first year students enrolled in their first term of community college• 594 participants were included• Students that withdrew from the course were not

included in the study (N=127)• Participants were enrolled in Essentials in Reading (RDG

009) or Reading and Study Skills (RDG 050) • Students who concurrently enrolled in Strategies for

Success (SFS 101) and one of the above mentioned reading courses were compared with those in a reading course but not concurrently enrolled in SFS 101

Descriptive Data• Students were divided into

4 sub-groups• RDG 009 only- 130• RDG 009/SFS 101- 54• RDG 050 only- 338• RDG 050/SFS 101- 72

• The population consisted of 54% females and 46% males

Participants by Gender

Sub-Group N Male Female

RDG 009- only 130 48% 52%

RDG 009/SFS 101 54 30% 70%

RDG 050- only 338 48% 52%

RDG 050/SFS 101 72 46% 54%

Total 594 46% 54%

Descriptive Data cont. Participants by Race/Ethnicity

Sub-Group N AsianAmerican

IndianAfrican

American Hispanic CaucasianNon-

Resident

RDG 009- only 130 1.5% 0.0% 7.7% 1.5% 89.2% 0.0%

RDG 009/SFS 101 54 0.0% 0.0% 20.4% 0.0% 79.6% 0.0%

RDG 050 338 0.6% 0.0% 7.1% 2.1% 89.9% 0.3%

RDG 050/SFS 101 72 1.4% 1.4% 18.1% 1.4% 76.4% 1.4%

Total 594 0.8% 0.2% 9.8% 1.7% 87.2% 0.3%

• Population is representative of the college population• Fall 2010 cohort

• 0.6% Asian• 0.3% American Indian• 5.4% African American• 2.2% Hispanic• 92.0% Caucasian• 0% Non-Resident

• Fall 2011 cohort• 0.6% Asian• 0.4% American Indian• 5.6% African American• 1.5% Hispanic• 90.7% Caucasian• 0.7% Non-Resident

Descriptive Data cont.

Sample Population by Age

Sub-Group N 17-20 21-24 25-30 31-39 40-55 Over 55

RDG 009- only 130 90.8% 5.4% 3.1% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0%

RDG 009/SFS 101 54 70.4% 22.2% 3.7% 0.0% 3.7% 0.0%

RDG 050 338 82.2% 9.2% 4.4% 3.0% 1.2% 0.0%

RDG 050/SFS 101 72 100.0% 23.5% 11.8% 3.9% 2.0% 0.0%

Total 594 81.6% 10.4% 4.5% 2.2% 1.2% 0.0%

Campus Population by Age

17-20 21-24 25-30 31-39 40-55 Over 55

Fall 2010 Cohort 37.6% 15.2% 15.5% 15.1% 12.5% 2.2%

Fall 2011 Cohort 33.9% 16.1% 15.8% 16.0% 13.7% 2.4%

Results of RQ1

• Completion of Terms• RDG 009 (middle level course)• Students completed about the same number of credit

hours

SFS N Mean Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

Completion of Terms

Without Success Course

130 3.25 2.125 0.186

With Success Course 54 3.24 2.206 0.3

Results of RQ1 cont.

• Completion of terms• RDG 050 (higher level course)• Students completed about the same number of terms

Average of Completed Terms for Students in RDG 050

SFS N Mean Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

Completion of Terms

Without Student Success

338 3.77 2.107 0.115

With Student Success

72 3.58 2.275 0.268

Results of RQ2

• Grade Point Average• RDG 009 (middle level course)• Students with a success course achieved a significantly

higher GPA than those without a success course

Average of GPA of Students in RDG 009

SFS N Mean Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

Cum GPA

Without Success Course 130 1.57 1.15 0.1

With Success Course 54 1.98 1.36 0.19

Results of RQ2 cont.

• Grade Point Average• RDG 050 (higher level course)• Students achieved a similar GPA’s in both test groups

Average GPA of Students in RDG 050

SFS N Mean Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

Cum GPA

Without Student Success 338 2.13 1.09 0.06

With Student Success 72 2.1 1.24 0.15

Discussion

• Effects on Advising• Qualities of an Effective Success Course• Suggestions for Future Research• Conclusion

Effects on Advising

• Mandatory success courses for students in remedial reading and/or other remedial courses

• Pairing sections of remedial courses with sections of success courses

• Success courses taught by advisors can increase the connection to the institution

Qualities of an Effective Success Course• Curriculum• College resources• Transitioning to college• Career development• Study/Research skills• Life management skills

• Full time instructors

• Mandatory vs Optional

• Credit Hours(Stovall, 1999, 2000)

Suggestions for Future Research• Non-traditional students in strategies courses versus

traditional students in strategies courses

• Students in remedial English or math courses

• Evaluation of strategies course curriculum

Conclusion

• A Strategies for success course can increase student GPA for students in remedial courses.

• The completion of terms was not effected in this study by a Strategies for Success course, but from the literature studies show that it can impact retention.

Small Groups

• In groups of 2-3 discuss what you have learned

1. Do you have success courses on your campus? If so, how have they benefitted your students?

2. How can you use this information on your campus?

3. What strategies have you used to help students in remedial education be successful?

Questions?• Thank you!

Emily Walters Learning Assistance Center Specialist (217) 234-5301 ewalters@lakeland.cc.il.us 5001 Lake Land Blvd. Fax: (217) 234-5390 Mattoon, IL 61938

References• Abreu-Ellis, C., Ellis, J., & Hayes, R. (2009). College preparedness and time of

learning disability identification. Journal of Developmental Education, 32(3), 28-38. Retrieved from EBSCOhost database

• American Association of Community Colleges (AACC). (2012, April). Reclaiming the American dream: A report from the 21st-century commission on the future of community colleges. Available from the American Association of Community Colleges website: http://www.aacc.nche.edu/AboutCC/21stcenturyreport/21stCenturyReport.pdf

• Bettinger, E. P., & Long, B. (2005). Remediation at the community college: Student participation and outcomes. New Directions for Community Colleges, 129, 17–26. doi: 10.1002/cc.182

• Bettinger, E. P., & Long, B. (2009). Addressing the needs of underprepared students in higher education: Does college remediation work? Journal of Human Resources, 44(3), 736-771.

References• Breer, L. (2012). Annual report.• Breer, L. (2013). Developmental studies annual report. • Burley, H. Butner, B. & Cejda, B. (2001). Dropout and stopout patterns

among developmental education students in Texas community colleges. Community College Journal of Research Practice, 25(10), 767-782. DOI: 10.1080/106689201753235903.

• Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. (2008). The American community college (5th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

• Deil-Amen, R., & Rosenbaum, J. E. (2002). The unintended consequences of stigma-free remediation. Sociology of Education, 75(3), 249-268.

• Fain, P. (2013, June 5). Remediation if you want it. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved January 23, 2014, from http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/06/05/florida-law-gives-students-and-colleges-flexibility-remediation

References• Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. (n.d.). U.S. Department of

Education. Retrieved March 2, 2014, from http://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/ferpa/index.html.

• Feely, C. L. (2011). The impact of remedial coursework on transfer student success (Unpublished master’s thesis). Eastern Illinois University, Charleston, IL.

• Fensterwald, J. (2013, March 28). Promising signs, potential lessons from Long Beach college promise. Ed Source. Retrieved January 23, 2014, from http://edsource.org/today/2013/promising-signs-potential-lessons-from-long-beach-college-promise/29409

• Goldrick-Rab, S. (2010). Challenges and opportunities for improving community college Student success. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 437-469. doi:10.3102/0034654310370163

• Horn, C., McCoy, Z., Campbell, L., & Brock, C. (2009). Remedial testing and placement in community colleges. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 33(6), 510-526.

References• Levinson, D. L. (2005) Community colleges: A reference handbook Santa

Barbara, Calif. ABC-CLIO• National Center for Education Statistics (2004). National study of

postsecondary faculty: 2004. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education. Data Analysis System Website http://www.nces.ed.gof.das

• Roessler, B. (2006). A quantitative study of revenue and expenditures at United States public community colleges, 1980-2001. PhD dissertation, University of North Texas, Denton, TX.

• Stovall, M. L. (1999). Relationships between participation in a community college student success course and academic performance and persistence (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois, Urbana, IL.

• Stovall, M. L. (2000). Using success courses for promoting persistence and completion. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2000(112), 45-54. Retrieved from EBSCOhost website

• Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago.

References• Tinto, V. (1998). Colleges as communities: Taking research on student

persistence seriously. The Review of Higher Education, 21(2), 167-177. • Tuckman, B. J. (2011). Teaching learning strategies to increase success of

first-term college students. Journal of Experimental Education, 79(4), 478-504. Retrieved from EBSCOhost website

• Vaughan, G.B. (2006) The community college story /Washington, D.C. : American Association of Community Colleges

• Watson, L. D., & Rycraft, J. R. (2010). The enhancement seminar model as a strategy to promote diversity and student success in MSW programs. Journal of Social Work Education, 46(1), 123-131. Retrieved from EBSCOhost website

• The White House. (n.d.). Building American skills through community colleges. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/education/higher-education/building-american-skills-through-community-colleges