Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Gateway to College:
Rethinking course design to increase motivation and
engagement in at-risk students
OverviewOIntroductionOExpectationsOGateway Program pre-
courseOCourse CreationOCourse RevisionsOQuestions & Discussion
Gateway B.C. (Before Course)
“What to Expect” (from the brochure) O Orientation breakout sessions designed just for Gateway-eligible
studentsO Regular individual meetings with our Student Success SpecialistO Access to workshops designed to support students in their college
experienceO Connections to various college resources and support systems as
neededO Customized course load (12-14 credits) to allow more time to
develop skills and receive supportO The many benefits of sharing the learning experience with fellow
students
The reality?O I created workshops and
invited eligible students to attend
O I cross-referenced all their class schedules to find times
O I emailed instructorsO I stalked the Res HallsO I enlisted help from the
RHDsO I showed up in the basic
English & math classes to introduce myself, and…
O…managed to meet with only 50% of the students… once.
Unpacking some dataThe ‘08-’09 cohort 47 students10 Academically Dismissed by the end of their 3rd term10 Bachelor's degrees (6 in 9 terms or less)1 AA degree from CCV14 have earned credit at other VSC schools2 are still at Lyndon, having returned after time away
But then… what?The ‘08-’09 cohort The ‘09-’10 cohort
47 students10 Academically Dismissed
10 Bachelor's degrees 1 AA degree from CCV
14 have earned credit at other VSC schools
2 still at Lyndon
39 students20 Academically Dismissed
5 Bachelor's degrees (3 LSC, 1 CSC, 1 JSC)
1 AS degree from VTC
14 have earned credit at other VSC schools
3 still active at Lyndon
Creating the CoursePurpose:To provide a learning commons for:
O Students in two or more basic skills courses (mandatory)O Students admitted from the Admissions waitlist (mandatory)O Students in one basic skills course and who request inclusion
(optional)
Students will:O Have the opportunity to connect with others facing similar academic
challenges O Receive targeted support to enhance opportunities for success in
the first semester O Meet one-on-one with the Student Success Specialist, or
designated course instructor, every other week
Response?O “The individual
meetings were helpful, but the class time was not very helpful.”
O “Way too much overlap with INT 1020.”
O “Just skip the class stuff and add more personal meetings.”
O “More information from the academic support center and writing center”
O “Should be able to drop this class if we want.”O “Make it more interesting.”
Retreat & RethinkO What are the actual
needs of our at-risk students?
O How are we defining “at-risk”?
O What does it mean to be “at-risk”?
O What interventions actually make a difference?
Revision #1O For the 2011-2012 cohort
O Course still mandatoryO Class attendance totally optionalO Individual meetings requiredO “Prescription for Success”
O An overcorrectionO Too unstructuredO Lessened the personal connection
Data Check!‘08-’09
(47 students)
• 10 dismissals
• 10 BA/BS• 1 AA/AS• 14 with
other VSC credit
• 2 active LSC
‘09-’10 (39
students)• 20
dismissals• 5 BA/BS• 1 AA/AS• 14 with
other VSC credit
• 3 active LSC
‘10-’11(59
students)• 7
dismissals• 3 BA/BS• 2 AA/AS• 20 with
other VSC credit
• 2 active LSC
‘11-’12(30
students)• 7
dismissals• 9 with
other VSC credit
• 8 active LSC
Revision #2I worked under the following assumptions:
O Not all at-risk students need the same interventions.
O Students work best when invited instead of required to participate.
O Individual meetings are essential for both relationship-building and for catching the kinds of risk factors that are rarely shared in a classroom setting.
O Students who connect early and often with support services on campus tend to be more successful.
Revision #2 (cont.)Triangulated between 1st and 2nd year & revived the workshop idea from Gateway B.C.
O Students were allowed to opt-outO Class meetings would be workshops on
specific topics announced in advance. Not required.
O Grade based on collection of points earnedO Changed to "Action Records" O Still 3 in-person meetings
Data Check!‘12-’13
(57 students)
• 7 Dismissals
• 3 withdrew• 4 earned
other VSC credit
• 17 active LSC
‘13-’14 (45
students)• 7
Dismissals• 2 withdrew• 4 earned
other VSC credit
• 24 active LSC
‘14-’15 (33
students)• 3
Dismissals• 2 withdrew• 30 active
LSC
What a difference?Pre-Course Post-Course
O Never met with more than 50% of cohort
O All responsibility on the instructor
O No idea why students were persisting or not
O Reactive interventionsO Students who did form a
relationship seemed to do better
O Met with 95% or more of cohort
O Shared responsibility, but primarily on student
O Know why students leave or stay
O Proactive & collaborative interventions
O Stronger relationships formed
DiscussionO What are the strengths and limitations of
this model?O How can this be applied to other topics
and subjects and student populations?O Your questions?
Contact InformationKate GoldDirector of Advising ResourcesCarhartt Advising Resource CenterLyndon State [email protected]
