Monroe Community College Practices to Retain Students in Online Learning Dr. Jeffrey P. Bartkovich Marie J. Fetzner Monroe Community College May 11, 2004

Monroe Community College

Practices to Retain Students in Online Learning

Dr. Jeffrey P. Bartkovich Marie J. Fetzner

Monroe Community CollegeMay 11, 2004

Monroe Community College 2

Introduction and Welcome

Presenter introductionsPresentation protocolsThanks to ITC


Purposes of Presentation

Evolving online program

Researching non-retained students

Reviewing basic results

Managing online services

Developing online policy


MCC’s Online Program

MCC is part of SUNY• Founded in 1961; 13,326 FTE in 2003

Joined SUNY Learning Network (SLN) in 1997

Spring 2004 MCC SLN Summary Data• Headcount = 3,434• Online FTE = 328.43• Courses = 86; Sections = 121

Sharing in the development and delivery of SLN courses


MCC Online Courses and Sections

Fall 1997 to Spring 2004Source: MCC Academic Affairs and Educational Technology

86

778187

7371

55

41

2513

4

83 80 85

121

112

109

113

9097

69

49

32

13

4

110 104 110

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

FA97

SP98

FA98

SP99

FA99

SP00

FA00

SP01

FA01

SP02

FA02

SP03

FA03

SP04

Semester

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

Courses

Sections


MCC Educational Technology Services (ETS)

Organization

CIO

Communications &Network Services

Computing Services Library ServicesInstructional Technologies

Telecommunication &PC Support

Distance Learning

Electronic Learning Centers


MCC Online Student Retention Study #1

Characteristics and Attitudesof Non-Retained Online

Students


Online Retention Study Method

Archival Data Analysis• Grades and demographics for online

courses retrieved from student records database

Student Survey• Survey created and administered to

sample of students who received an “F” or “W” in an online course for the Fall semesters in 2000, 2001 and 2002


Archival Data Analysis

MCC Online vs. MCC On-site Grade Distribution Grade Rates Success Rates in Matched (ftf vs.

same section online) Courses


Survey Instrument

Total of 45 questions in three areas• Expectations at time of registration• Satisfaction at time of withdrawal• Reasons for withdrawal

Likelihood of enrolling in another online course


Grade RatesOL vs. Site-based, Fall

Semester

1999 2000 2001 2002

OL N 970 1,417 1,916 2473

C and Higher

69.7% 65.8% 65.3% 63.6%

F/W 24.8% 26.4% 29.7% 30.2%

MCC N 43,779 45,235 48,288 52,428

C and Higher

70.3% 69.7% 70.7% 70.7%

F/W 20.0% 21.3% 20.6% 20.5%


Success Rates in Matched Online and Site-based

Courses

Site-based, n = 16,291

Online, n = 1,719

% C or Better PercentagePoint

DifferenceOnline Site-based

Total 64.2 69.6 -5.4

Full-timePart-time

56.472.3

70.366.7

-13.95.6

1st time FT1st time & at risk1st time & not at risk

39.747.266.3

72.266.674.0

-32.5-19.4-7.7

Under 25 years of age25 years of age or older

54.575.2

67.875.7

-13.30.5


Expectations* at Time of Registration

% First-Time Students

% Experienced Students

Can Begin Anytime 41.4 18.8

Online Easier than On-Campus

40.4 22.3

Less Homework than On-Campus

40.0 20.0

Faculty Interaction Required 35.6 15.0

Need Basic Computer Skills 28.3 14.1

Participate Independently 18.9 35.0

*Definitely what I expected + Sort of what I expected


Satisfaction* at Time of Withdrawal

% First-Time Students


Own Performance in Course 30.0 14.0

Technical Help with the Course

28.6 13.5

Registration/Orientation 26.4 9.8

SLN in General 23.4 13.9

Directions Provided by Faculty

22.8 14.0

Directions to Get Started 10.9 15.1

*Somewhat satisfied + Extremely satisfied


Explanation for Non-Success

in Online Course

Top Five Factors% First-

Time Students


Lack of Motivation 46.3 24.4

Course Taking too Much time

43.0 18.8

Instructor’s Teaching Style

43.0 18.4

Too Many Technical Difficulties

41.9 19.8

Got Behind/Couldn’t Catch Up

41.7 22.1


General FindingsArchival Analysis

When compared to site-based courses at MCC Online students are more likely to

earn a grade of C or better if they are >25 years of age and are part-time students

First-time, full-time online students are least likely earn a grade of C or better


General FindingsSurvey Analysis

Expectations Online format expectations not accurate Level of online interaction with faculty and

other students not accurate Technical expectations (needed PC and

typing skills) not accurate

Percentage of W/F students’ likelihood to take another online course is decreasing Approximately 1/3 are likely or somewhat

likely


General FindingsSurvey Analysis

Levels of Satisfaction First-time students more satisfied at

time of withdrawal in general, and with their own performance

Experienced students less satisfied with• Registration procedures• SLN in general• Directions from faculty


Significant Positive Correlations*

Likelihood to take another online course SLN in general (.604) Interaction with other students (.518) Directions provided by faculty (.491) Directions to get started (.483) Interaction with the faculty (.428) Technical help with course (.408)

GPA and credit hours are not significant with likelihood to take another online course

*Significant at 0.01 level


Research Informing Practice: Applications

Online student orientation project Development and distribution of student CD Phone calls made to first-time online students On-site student orientations implemented* Development of Ten Myths Videostream Expansion of PC access for MCC students

• Wireless laptops for check-out in Libraries• Learning Center support for online students

*An analysis was conducted on online student performance outcomes for those students who attended on-site MCC orientations.


Research Informing Practice

Additional materials development SLN Student Awareness Sheet Retention strategies included in online faculty

course development trainings Emphasis placed on pre-course activities and

first week of course interactions Promote self-paced free technology training

to MCC students Preliminary discussion of MCC policies

• Forwarded to Academic Leadership Council


MCC Online Student Retention Study #2

An Analysis of Online Students’Performance and Differentiation


The Research

Previous research identified characteristics of students at risk of F/W grades in online courses. These were:

First-time online students Full-time students with less than 30

earned credits Students under the age of 25 Minority students


The Research

Current study reviewed impact and correlation of the following factors on retention: Time of registration Age Experience Part/full time students Basic academic skills


Some Results

Students who registered during the first week of classes had a 50/50 chance of earning a grade of C or better

65% of the F/W grades were among students under the age of 25

For students to have a 50/50 chance of earning a C or better in an online course, their basic academic skills should be at the college English level


Some Results

Between the ages of 21 & 25, a student had a 50/50 chance of earning a C or better

The best chance of getting a C or better• Register 5 weeks before the start of the

semester • Be age 25 or above


What Does the Analysis Show?

Factors important to success in online courses: Time of registration The age of the student The academic preparedness of the

student


Summary of Key Findings

Retention of online MCC students is impacted by these characteristics:• First-time (vs. Experienced) online students• Amount of previous higher education

credits for full-time online students• Student age (<25)• Lack of PC skills and lack of access to a PC


Policy Analysis

Policy Factors College is enrollment driven The online program is supporting

enrollment growth The demographics of enrollment

growth for the College are the same demographics of non-success in online courses


Policy Questions

Should policy account for motivation? At what “odds of failure” do we restrict

enrollment? Should online growth be allowed to

continue to support college enrollment growth?

What is the balance between student success and online enrollment growth?


Program Development

Advice from the literature The course design/level of interaction The experience of the faculty The level of technical support A student pre-course orientation Manage student expectations upfront Professional development and training for

faculty Standardized course management system


Advice from Students

Be ready for independent learning. Must be self-motivated.

Once you get started, stay on track. Online courses require lots of reading,

homework and research. Get ready for the demands.

Must develop a schedule to go online, must manage your time.

Talk to other people and to other students before you take the class, and during the class.


Managing Services

Manage the Expectations Welcome letter from Academic Vice

President has been expanded Face-to-face student orientations offered*

MCC Online Orientation CD distributed

Phone calls made to all Fall 2002 online students and 1st-time Spring 2003 online students

*additional analysis conducted


Managing Services

Manage the Support Services Student Services web page

expansion Revisions made to the service

gateway to online learning web page Brochures at Records and

Registration and at the Counseling Center


Research to Inform Practice:

Managing Services

Manage the Academics Retention strategies integrated into

faculty trainings Discipline-specific retention studies Discussions on other academic support

—online tutoring, writing centers, etc. Pilot test CourseSpace (use of online

template for web course enhancement)


Next Steps:Things to Consider

Services Policies Definition of “Retention” for data

collection Replicate studies at other

institutions


Contact Information

Dr. Jeffrey P. [email protected]

Marie J. [email protected]

MCC Web Page: www.monroecc.edu

MCC Online Learning page:http://www.monroecc.edu/depts/distlearn/index.htm

Documents

Monroe Community College Practices to Retain Students in Online Learning Dr. Jeffrey P. Bartkovich Marie J. Fetzner Monroe Community College May 11, 2004