18th National Conference on Students in Transition … · Results are presented using the 4-S...

1

18th National Conference on Students in Transition

October 8-10, 2011 St. Louis, Missouri

A "Happy Mess" Revisited: Extending what we know about the senior year transition

for first generation students

Julia Overton-Healy

Director, Leadership Programs and the Women's Leadership Center

Alfred University

607-871-2971

[email protected]

Heather Maietta

Director of Career Services and Cooperative Education

Merrimack College

978-837-5038

[email protected]

The original study (Overton-Healy, 2010) identified several key and shared experiences as

reported by first-generation college seniors. The findings indicated that this particular student

population undergo important transitional challenges, including a re-identification of self,

responding to the conflicted role of family, and engaging in self-efficacy strategies. Additionally,

the original research outlined institutional responses which the data indicated would be useful

interventions to assist this population. The current study uncovered similar results, but with

some crucial differences which the presenters suggest are indicative of how institutional context

impacts transition. Results are presented using the 4-S System design from Schlossberg's Adult

Transition Theory (1984).

Understanding and Engaging Under-Resourced College Students

Bethanie Tucker

Professor of Education

Averett University

843-907-6617

[email protected]

Economic forces are bringing an increasingly diverse student population to the door steps of

institutions of higher education. Two-thirds of the students who enter higher education do not

complete a degree within six years, and among low- and moderate income students, the

statistics are even grimmer. Under-resourced students often have limited access to resources,

such as support systems, mentors, and money. Without the advantage of the inter-generational

transfer of knowledge many students feel both disconnected and doomed to failure. Participants

will develop enhanced understanding of how to: • Use teaching strategies to build cognitive

ability • Implement developmental models in their disciplines to move students from concrete

learning to the abstract thinking and planning required in college • Improve retention by building

relationships of mutual trust and respect

AVID Postsecondary: Support, Retention and Success

mailto:[email protected]

2

Betty Krohn

Program Manager-AVID Postsecondary AVID Center

972-591-2520

[email protected]

Our session will address AVID Postsecondary as a systemic initiative to support students who are

under-prepared for college. We will examine how the postsecondary initiative: • Provides a

academic training program to develop college success skills needed for academic success,

persistence and graduation • Reduces barriers that traditionally limit levels of academic

achievement • Facilitates professional development using student success pedagogies applicable

across academic disciplines and student services • is planned and implemented around five AVID

Postsecondary Essentials: 1. Administrative Leadership and Support 2. AVID College Planning

Team 3. Professional Development 4. Freshman Experience and Beyond 5. Data Collection and

Research Our session will also engage participants by examining the following three areas of

distinctive impact AVID makes to increase student persistence and completion: Campus Culture:

• Culture changes when belief systems change • The power of high expectations and high

support • Focus on critical thinking through inquiry-based pedagogies • Change from teaching

environments to learning environments • Instructional strategies and student engagement

Students: • Student accountability – taking responsibility for their own learning; Advancement

via Individual Determination • Academic behaviors, competencies, efficacy, peer support,

mentoring • Rigor with support – tackling acceleration successfully, changing belief systems;

holding them to high expectations • Learning strategies applied to coursework versus isolated

study skills Faculty: • Engage faculty in  Planning for student academic success

 Reducing institutional barriers to student persistence, acceleration and completion

 Advocacy for and monitoring of AVID students • AVID students will come to class

prepared to learn • Professional development in teaching and engagement strategies • Research-

based instructional methodologies We will address how AVID is relevant and replicable in diverse

environments using examples of implementations from current institutions: Augsburg College,

Minnesota; Central Texas College; Huston-Tillotson University, Texas; Los Medanos Community

College, California; Skagit Valley College, Washington; Southwest Texas Junior College; Texas

A&M Commerce; Texas A&M Kingsville; Texas College; Texas State Technical College, Harlingen;

University of Houston Downtown; University of Texas Pan American, University of Texas of the

Permian Basin, Wiley College, Texas. Targeted Audience: This session would be best attended by

postsecondary (two-year or four-year institutions) administrators, teachers, and counselors.

Involvement of Participants: Presenters will utilize group readings and dialogue to involve and

stimulate the audience. Short videos, readings, and PowerPoint presentations may be used to

illustrate key points and to provide a visual framework.

Faculty Mentorship Program for Freshman Students with Disabilities

Taiping Ho

Professor

Ball State University

765-285-5983

[email protected]

During this poster presentation we will provide information on the implementation of

the FMP and learning opportunities that have been offered to faculty as a result. The

presentation will focus on the reasons for the FMP, the process for beginning the FMP,

and the benefits of the FMP for students with disabilities. By the end of this

3

presentation, attendees will understand the need for such a program and know the

personnel and resources involved in implementation. Additionally, the results of

qualitative and quantitative research regarding the effectiveness of the program will

be shared. Information will also be provided on learning opportunities that have been

offered to faculty and staff as a result of this grant including: • Best practices for

accommodating students with different disability types (visually impaired, deaf/hard

of hearing, autism, learning disabilities, acquired brain injuries). • The transition to

college for students with disabilities. • Adaptive technology for SWDs. • Academic

support for SWDs. • Emotional difficulties in the classroom. • Communicating with

students with disabilities. • Incorporating universal design of instruction into the

classroom. • A historical overview of access to postsecondary education for SWDs.

Larry Markle

Director of Office of Disabled Student Development


765-285-5293

[email protected]

Jacqueline Harris

Coordinator of Study Strategies and Writing


765-285-8107

[email protected]

Roger Wessel

Associate Professor of Higher Education


765-285-5486

[email protected]

Assessing and Supporting Students Entering a Nursing Program

Sandra Nadelson

Director Student Services and Advising College of Health Sciences

Boise State University

208-426-4679

[email protected]

After the tool development and administration, the results were tallied by factor.

Environment had the highest number of low scores with 17. This was followed by

academics (14), then affective (12) and finally professional integration (6). Areas that

often had lower marks included comfort with writing and test anxiety. Students with

three or more low scores were contacted by the director of student services and

additional resources provided if students felt they were needed. Throughout the

semester, students were made aware of student services available to help them. A

Facebook advising group was also developed to help students quickly get information

they needed. Our plan is to readminister the tool to the next group that begins in one

month. We are also monitoring attrition and GPA of these students. Our hope that both

will be improved as a result of this work.

Louis Nadelson

Assistant Professor

4


208-426-2856

[email protected]

Promoting Transfer Student Success through a Foundations Course

Sandra Nadelson

Director Student Services and Advising College of Health Sciences


208-426-4679

[email protected]

Transferring from one institution to another can provide students with greater

opportunities in terms of learning. However, transferring has shown to lead to drops in

GPA and emotional stress (Lanaan, 2001; Thurmond, 2007). Providing support for

students transferring can help improve their adjustment to the new location

(Townsend, & Wilson, 2008-2009). At our university, first and second students will be

taking two courses that will help them develop their critical thinking skills, ability to

work through ethical problems, see the world more globally, and participate in service

learning. A question came up about whether the transfer students needed to take both

courses. We did not want the transfer students to take courses that were filled with

beginning students due to differing needs. However, we also didn’t want to have them

miss out on this knowledge and these important skills. With this in mind, we began

developing a required course for transfer students. The overall goal is to help this

group of students be more successful in our university in a supportive and interactive

course. This roundtable discussion will focus on the needs of transfer students, our

course development process, and how we will monitor student outcomes. We invite

people who have considered developing or have developed similar courses to attend

and discuss the process with us. References Laanan, F (2001). Transfer student

adjustment. New Directions in Community Colleges, pg. 5-13. Thurmond, K.C. (2007).

Transfer Shock: Why is a Term Forty Years Old Still Relevant? Retrieved from NACADA

Clearinghouse of Academic Advising Resources Web site:

http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Clearinghouse/AdvisingIssues/Transfer-Shock.htm

Townsend, B. & Wilson, K. (2008-2009). The academic and social integration of

persisting community college transfer students. J. College Student Retention, 10(4)

405-423

Louis Nadelson

Assistant Professor


208-426-2856

[email protected]

From the Inside Out: Inspiring Pedagogical Change

Lisa Nardi

Writing Specialist & Co-leader of Faculty Think Tank/Scholars' Studio program

Bowie State University

301-860-3297

[email protected]

http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Clearinghouse/AdvisingIssues/Transfer-Shock.htm

5

Providing meaningful opportunity for first-year students at access institutions requires

that faculty move beyond traditional pedagogies. For many instructors, this change

marks a complete paradigm shift. As Freire and others noted, when confronted with

challenges, educators who attempt this shift often revert to the habits through which

they were socialized. Lasting change is unlikely until faculty members have

experienced these new paradigms phenomenologically and established their own

visions for providing opportunity. This session explores the dynamics of pedagogical

change and provides a glimpse into the Faculty Think Tank, a model that offers faculty

a structured process for exploring and transforming their pedagogical challenges. This

session provides a brief experience of the Faculty Think Tank environment by engaging

participants in a simulated Faculty Think Tank session. The practice experience will

include an exploration of a specific pedagogical challenge (e.g. creating safety in the

learning environment), a phenomenological discussion of the challenge and

implications for pedagogy, and identification of cross-disciplinary, transformative

practices. Particularly relevant for first year and general education faculty and support

staff, this session values the power a student’s introductory experience can have in

shaping their understanding of their role and agency in the learning process.

Additional Presenter: Monica Turner, Director of TRiO/SSS & Co-leader of Faculty Think

Tank/Scholars' Studio program, Bowie State University, 14000 Jericho Park Rd.,

Bowie, MD 20715, 301-860-3296, [email protected]

Monica Turner

Director of TRiO/SSS & Co-Leader Faculty Think Tank/Scholars' Studio program

Bowie State University

301-860-3296

[email protected]

Transfer Transitions: Improving Outcomes for Transfer Students at Brooklyn College

Patrick Kavanagh

Executive Assistant the Dean

Brooklyn College -- CUNY

718.951.5771

[email protected]

The presentation will cover the planning, implementation, and assessment of the College's first

attempt to provide dedicated sections of core courses for entering transfer students.

Niesha Ziehmke

Associate Director of Undergraduate Studies

Brooklyn College

718.951.5771

[email protected]

Teaching Large Lecture Classes using Student Self-Designed Summary

City University of Hong Kong

Oi Sze Sally Tsang

Instructor I, Department of Management Sciences

City University of Hong Kong

852 34428583

6

[email protected]

CHINA

How do we keep students engaged and motivated inside a 200-size lecture theatre,

especially when the topics are not easy to grasp from the students' perspective? 4

steps can be employed: 1. Introduce topics covered using terminologies; 2. Describe

the solving procedures and areas in which the theory applies; 3. Illustrate the

applications; 4. Organize the materials at Student Self-Designed Summary and explore

beyond the theory. For each step, hand-drawn pictures are used to facilitate learning

and to arouse students’ interest and imagination. Students can feel free to draw a

similar pictures and key points at their Student Self-Designed Summary. There is

statistically significant evidence that using Student Self-Designed Summary results in

higher attendance rate, better assessment result, satisfactory teaching evaluation and

fruitful feedback from students.

Quit Smoking and Go to School: Behavior Change Research from Health Care and Its

Implications for Student Success.

Mark Bocija

Associate Professor

Columbus State Community College

614-287-5049

[email protected]

Students who engage in pro-academic behaviors appropriate to their academic goals

tend to achieve them and, naturally, the converse is equally predictable. A truism to be

sure, yet surprisingly little attention has been directed specifically toward promoting

pro-academic behaviors in at-risk students. Simple, practical, and effective strategies

are needed to guide both students who are ready to make positive behavioral changes

and higher education professionals who teach and advise them. Over the past twenty

years health care researchers and practitioners have produced a vast body of empirical

literature identifying key principals and effective strategies for facilitating positive

change around health-related behaviors. Abundant evidence attests to the efficacy of

these models. The purpose of this session is to draw attention to the central

importance of the behavioral dimension of student success, to introduce the scientific

research related to positive behavior modification that has been shown to be effective

in impacting health-related behaviors, and to suggest some avenues for applying key

evidence-based principals to First Year Experience strategies. This session will begin

by exploring various theoretical models of behavior change. In particular the

presentation will highlight the Theory of Reasoned Action, the Theory of Planned

Behavior, the Transtheoretical Model of Change, and Social Cognitive Theory. This part

of the presentation will draw heavily upon the recently published work of Leslie R.

Martin, Kelly B. Haskard-Zolnierek, and M. Robin Dematteo, Health Behavior Change

and Treatment Adherence, (Oxford University Press: 2010). This book provides a

thoughtful synthesis of empirical knowledge related to behavior and behavior change

and offers recommendations derived from evidence-based practices. The work of

James Prochaska and Carlo DiClemente will also figure prominently in the discussion.

While this research was aimed at understanding health-related behaviors, the

principles that have emerged from the scholarship are relevant to higher education

professionals, particularly those of us who have taken on the task of retaining at-risk

student. The second part of the presentation will focus on the relationship between

positive behavioral change and other motivational factors that enhance and are

7

enhanced by behavior such as goal setting, self-efficacy, optimism, beliefs about

outcomes, perceptions of benefits and costs, and social support. These factors are

highly correlated with both student success and positive behavioral change. This part

of the presentation will draw on the scholarship of Albert Bandura, Bruce Tuckman,

Frank Pajares, and Dale Shunk. The presentation will conclude with concrete

suggestions for utilizing the abundance of empirical evidence related to behavior

change along with goal setting and goal attainment strategies to motivate and sustain

behavior change in at-risk students.

EBI and MAP-Works: A Focus on Assessment and Student Retention

Darlena Jones

Director of Education and Program Development

Educational Benchmarking Inc.

417-492-0081

[email protected]

For many first-year/freshman students, the first college year is the first time they’re

away from home and independent. Life choices like time management, self-

management, and healthy behaviors are in their control. Some students make the

transition easily while other students struggle. This period can set the tone for what

students expect, how much they get involved, and what they experience. Sophomore

students, having successfully transitioned to college life, find that a new set of

transition experiences face them. Sophomores can struggle with choosing a major or

career path, family expectations, or increased academic expectations and challenges.

EBI, in collaboration with Ball State University, developed a survey project to provide

quality information and to share the responsibility for student success. The project is

titled Making Achievement Possible Works (MAP-Works) because it is structured,

literally, to help make student achievement possible and to focus on early

interventions. These surveys are designed to reveal the strengths and talents of

students and potential transition issues like homesickness and time management.

Each student receives an individualized report that helps them identify areas for

further growth and connects them to campuses resources. In addition, individual

student information and feedback are provided to faculty/staff that are directly

connected to them (e.g. residence hall staff, academic advisors, first-year seminar

instructors, or retention committee members) to facilitate one-on-one interventions

with students struggling in their transition. Smaller check-up surveys are administered

throughout the academic year to measure the key transition areas. Faculty/staff use

the information from these assessments to identify and support individual students

and to create group programming and monitor group progress.

Personal Financial Literacy Instruction in Higher Education: Critical Concepts for the

"New Economy"

Jason Springer

Director of Elon 101 & Asst. Director of Academic Advising

Elon University

336.264.9140

[email protected]

Currently Elon offers approximately 20 sections of COE 310/375: Transitions

8

Strategies annually. These themed courses focus on post-Elon planning pertaining to

job search, graduate school, working/living abroad, and financial literacy. Among the

most popular, the financial literacy sections of this course explore personal finance

from both the micro (how to make a budget and your pay bills) to the macro (how

does public policy impact my finances). Students often come to terms with the

decisions made before and during their first few years of college. In my experience

teaching these courses I have found that students often have very little understanding

of the decisions they've made and how they will impact their future. While there is

minimal research on the long term impact of large student loan debt for undergraduate

degrees, there is a great deal of media and political attention being paid to these

issues. The shifting political and financial landscape at both the state and federal level

suggest that this issue will be something that universities and their students will be

forced to deal with in the not-to-distant future. More broadly we know that student

loans have overtaken credit cards as the largest form of consumer debt in the US. More

and more of our students are graduating with tens of thousands of dollars in debt. This

coupled with high student credit card debt and a weak job market make for a toxic

combination for our graduates. In this session I will explore the moral, ethical, and

practical arguments for and against teaching the "skill" of personal finance.

SYE programs and academic development: Developing an assessment for program

evaluation

Benjamin Perlman

Area Director

Emory University

404-727-5870

[email protected]

The study being presented focused on the educational involvement and academic

autonomy subtasks of the SDTLA and how the scores correlated with the various

behaviors and characteristics measured in the instrument. Analysis of the data

identified several relevant findings. Participants who had completed a resume by the

end of their second year of college were more likely to have high educational

involvement scores. Also, the frequency of meetings with academic advisers was found

to be positively correlated with educational involvement and academic autonomy. How

often participants discussed academics with faculty was also found to have a

significant relationship with both measures of academic development. Several other

factors had small but significant relationships with academic development, including

discussing academics with family and friends. Another important finding was that

overall frequency of participation in SYE programs was not found to have any

relationship with academic development scores. An examination of demographic data

found that students who were the first in their family to attend college were less likely

to have completed a resume, and where second-year students lived had an effect on

their overall participation in the SYE program.

Promoting Access to HOPE and Graduation

Nia Haydel

Academic Professional for Student Retention

Georgia State University

404-413-2057

9

[email protected]

In Georgia, the HOPE scholarship is a mechanism for many students to pursue higher

education by covering 90% of tuition for students graduating with a 3.0 high school

GPA. Students are allowed one opportunity to gain HOPE during college at designated

check points. PATH (Promoting Access to HOPE) is a targeted initiative within the

Freshmen Learning Community program focused on assisting first time first-year

students develop superior academic skills and become fully integrated into the campus

community with the goal of PATH students earning HOPE by sophomore year. Research

demonstrates students who have a higher level of integration into the campus

community, understand how to successfully navigate through the higher education

system and have developed strong competencies in academic support areas are most

likely to be retained and to graduate. The strategies implemented at Georgia State to

strengthen the academic outcomes of the least prepared students can be easily

replicated to other universities regardless of the financial incentives. This session will

begin with a brief overview of the HOPE scholarship and its impact on higher education

in Georgia. All components of the developmental process will be shared including the

potential obstacles that may exist and strategies for managing the logistical and

political components of development and implementation. Materials outlining the

program development, curriculum and outcomes will be discussed and shared with

participants. The participants will have an opportunity to ask questions related to the

goals, outcomes and intent of the program as well as specifics related to the evolution

of PATH as we enter the 2nd year of the program. Participants will leave with a

strategic plan to explore similar initiatives for their campuses.

Nikolas Huot

Administrative Specialist Freshmen Learning Communities

Georgia State University

404-413-2085

[email protected]

Exploring the postsecondary experiences of students who completed dual enrollment

courses in high school: A case study

James Uhlenkamp

Writing center director and first year experience coordinator

Graceland University

641-344-8416

[email protected]

A preliminary investigation of the applicability of three theories to the transitions to

college as perceived by first year students, this presentation will begin with a brief

primer or review of the study’s theoretical framework: William Perry’s intellectual

development, Nancy Schlossberg’s transition, and John Sweller’s cognitive overload

theories. These theories may help to account for the attrition rate or maladaptation

leading to failures in the transition from high school to college, although this study

does not address these issues. The presentation will next describe the current state of

joint enrollment in the United States, focusing on Iowa, where rate of joint enrollment

has increased dramatically, going from around 187,000 credit hours in 2002 to over

306,000 in 2010. Following this description, the presentation will detail the lack of and

need for research on this phenomenon. Finally, the presentation will describe the

current study, which found that the four participants believed that joint enrollment did

10

help them prepare to move into the role of first year college students. The study

identified three themes : academic adjustment, personal and social adjustment and

institutional attributes. The four students stated that some of the academic

adaptations required by the joint enrollment class included how to apply the

information from a class more effectively, changes in study patterns and practices, and

a better feel for the academic demands of the college environment. The personal and

social adjustments included better time management, an increased sense of

responsibility and increased motivation. The students also identified some challenges

in adjustments: dealing with stress, changing personal and health habits, changing

living arrangements and competing or conflicting social expectations. The institutional

attributes found in the study originated in the students’ high school and in their

current institutions. The students discussed their joint enrollment instructors’

preparation and practices, the support they found at their current institutions, and the

advising they received. All indicated that the higher rigor of the joint enrollment

classroom left them better prepared than their non-joint enrollment high school

classmates. However, the need for additional academic and social adaptations

surprised some of the students. This study did not compare non-joint enrollment

perceptions to joint enrollment students, and the differing policies in different states

may have an effect on the findings of future studies. Give the dearth of empirical

studies in joint enrollment , this study provides a direction for fruitful investigation

and policy development.

Michele Dickey Kotz

Associate professor of education

Graceland University

641-784-5202

[email protected]

Brooke Glenn

Program Coordinator, Assessment & General Education

University of Nebraska-Lincoln

402-472-6023

[email protected]

Full Financial Aid in the Ivy League: How High-Achieving, Low-Income Undergraduates

Negotiate the Elite College Environment

Paul J. McLoughlin II

2010-2011 Paul F. Fidler Grant Recipient

Harvard University

781-209-0077

[email protected]

Three main conclusions derive from the findings of this research: Low-income

students’ tendency to make a distinction between socioeconomic and financial aid

status; the notion of a new cultural capital hierarchy for high-achieving, low-income

students within an elite college setting; and, a specific application of Bronfenbrenner’s

ecological developmental model for this niche population.

Examining Transitions in the Sophomore and Junior Years: Findings from the Diverse

Learning Environments Survey


11

John Pryor

Director, Cooperative Institutional Research Program

Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA

310.825.1925

[email protected]

This presentation will focus on the "transitions" aspects examined in the DLE survey. In

particular, the DLE focusses on extending research related to retention and degree

attainment with particular emphasis on theories that take into account diverse

populations. Using an expansion of Tinto’s model of student attrition (1975) in their

framework, Nora and Rendon (1990) created a new causal model to predict

community college students’ predisposition to transfer by examining the relationships

among student background characteristics, initial commitments, social integration,

academic integration, and the dependent variable, predisposition to transfer. The

student background characteristics that were utilized were parents’ educational

attainment, high school grades, encouragement by others, and ethnic origin. Initial

commitments were measured by the levels of educational goals and the institutional

commitment indicated by the students. Social integration was a single item measure,

but Tinto’s more controversial concept, academic integration, was measured using

academic perceptions, transfer perceptions, behavior counseling and academic

counseling. The DLE extends this work by examining academic integration in the

context of general and classroom validation. We also look at another theoretical

concept from this work, navigational capital and navigational action, which examine

the pathway that connects utilization and knowledge of support services (academic

advising, financial aid advising, etc.) to campus climate and eventual outcomes such as

retention and gains in cognitive and affective skills. Although the data are still being

processed as this proposal is written, and no analysis has been initiated, work with the

pilot data suggests that reliable and stable factors can be created from the individual

items and have predictive value in regression when used to predict various outcomes

measured on the DLE. Although the above theories will be the primary focus of the

presentation, two other sections of the DLE also serve to illuminate aspects of

transition. In one module we examine the transfer student experience and how they

navigate their new institution with an emphasis on the climate for transfer students.

In another module we examine the transition to the major for sophomores and for

juniors, especially looking at academic validation in the classroom and academic

engagement and student-faculty interaction.

Help students define and achieve success with the CollegeScope Student Success

Program

Darryl Johnston

Regional Account Manager

Human eSources

1-888-295-1520 ext.108

[email protected]

The issues of student retention and success cannot be solved simply by improving

grades and raising test scores. The solution begins with motivating students to fulfill

their individual potential by leading proactive and fulfilling lives. By helping students

develop a solid sense of self, encouraging the exploration of opportunities, and

instructing how to set attainable goals, students are able to maximize their education.

12

The CollegeScopeTM Student Success Program is a dynamic and innovative resource

that has decreased attrition in schools by as much as 26%. This session covers the

underlying theory of CollegeScope as well as the unique features of the program.

Attendees will hear success stories from other schools using CollegeScope and a

detailed explanation of how this curriculum positively impacts students. Different

delivery methods and teaching options for the program will also be highlighted. The

CollegeScope program includes: • Personal assessments that allow students to learn

more about their individual strengths and personalities, thereby becoming more self-

aware and confident about their natural traits. • An interactive curriculum that focuses

on college, career and lifelong success. The material provides direction while the

interactive elements engage and involve student in learning. As students move

through the electronic text, they are met with a wealth of quizzes, journals and

activities, ensuring retention of the material covered. • A focus on career

development, which is the backbone for educational planning, goal setting and

instilling motivation in students. CollegeScope demystifies career exploration,

expectations and planning by identifying best-fit career options as well as offering

different career possibilities. • Student management tools that increase accountability

and help faculty members monitor student progress. Staff can check student work,

read journal entries, review quiz scores, message their students and more. The

program was developed by Dr. Marsha Fralick while she was teaching college and

career success courses at Cuyamaca Community College. For her efforts, Dr. Fralick

recently received the 2011 Outstanding First-Year Student Advocate Award from The

National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience. The CollegeScope Student

Success Program is used at higher education institutions throughout North

America.

Summer Success Academy: The Transition from High School to College

Sarah Baker

Associate Dean and Academic Director of the Summer Success Academy

Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI)

317-274-8923

[email protected]

The presentation will primarily focus on 2010 assessment findings and the resulting

improvements that are to be incorporated into the 2011 program. The number of students

required to attend the program for 2010 was 734. If we include those students for whom

participation in the SPP was optional, 2,087 students could have participated in the program. In

2009 only 690 students were required to attend and 1,456 students could have attended

including the optional students. Though fewer required students returned their contracts stating

that they wanted to attend, we had a higher number of students attend and complete the SSA

than in 2009. In 2009 we had a total of 186 students complete the program and in 2010 we had

a total of 211 with 207 passing the program. The increase of students was largely due to the

amount of students who attended the SSA as an optional student, we saw a 100% increase in

optional students due to sending out contracts earlier in the year. This was the first year that

students did not pass the SSA. Four students did not pass the SSA; however, only two were

dismissed from IUPUI since two of the students were attending the SSA as an option. More

specifically, a total of 179 first-time, full-time conditionally admitted students completed the

2010 Summer Success Academy. There were 11 conditionally admitted students in 2010 who did

not participate in the SSA. The 11 students had an average SAT score of 1073 (range 980-

1170), notably higher than the SSA participants. Their fall-to-spring retention rate was 91%,

their average Fall GPA was 2.20, and 36% earned GPAs below a 2.00 during the fall semester.

13

There were 22 first-time, full-time students who attended the program in 2010 on an optional

basis and these students were not conditionally admitted. Their average fall GPA was 2.64 and

82% earned Fall GPAs above a 2.00. The average fall Math course grade was 2.70 and average

fall English course grade was 2.53 for the 22 optional participants.

Michele Hansen

Director of Assessment, University College

Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI

317-278-2618

[email protected]

David Sabol

Co-coordinator Summer Success Academy

Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI

317-274-2508

[email protected]

Students From Foster Care: Strategies for Improving Retention and Degree Completion

Julie Hamel

Advisor PILOTS program

Kansas State University

785-532-6927

[email protected]

Statistics about foster care students in post-secondary education are bleak. According

to the Casey Family Programs publication Supporting Success: Improving Higher

Education Outcomes for Students from Foster Care, approximately 20,000 young

people transition out of foster care annually, but they are noticeably underrepresented

in higher education. It is estimated that only 7-13% enroll in post-secondary

institutions, and that only 2% complete a bachelor’s degree, compared to 24% of the

general population. There is no typical demographic profile for the foster care student.

Individual circumstances vary widely, which in turn impacts the degree of support the

student may receive. Once the student has turned 18, eligibility for government

programs will vary from state to state, and the choice to participate in any program

belongs to the student alone. States such as Kansas offer a tuition waiver to students

in care, which allows them to attend a public post-secondary institution for free. In

addition to federal education aid, students may qualify for additional support until the

age of 21, if they choose to continue their education. Despite the efforts to provide

tangible support for students aging out of foster care, few attain degree completion.

Along with other students in transition, foster care youth arrive on campus with a

broad range of academic abilities and skill sets. However, unlike most other students,

they also bring with them the experience of significant personal trauma. It is common

for these students to have moved between homes and schools frequently, which often

contributes to poor academic preparation. Additional factors that may impact retention

are: little or no support from biological or foster families; inadequate independent

living experience; lack of coping skills to help with adjustment to campus life; financial

needs; lack of a home to return to on weekends, holidays, or breaks; and a reluctance

to seek help from college professionals. Some states and post-secondary institutions

have begun to look at what can be done to support and encourage students from foster

care in their efforts to transition into higher education and to complete degree

programs. In Kansas, concerned parties from Social Rehabilitative Services and major

14

universities have begun meeting to discuss strategies for assisting these students in

meeting their educational and personal goals. This roundtable discussion will facilitate

a dialogue about the unique needs of this underrepresented population, and bring

together those interested in learning what may be most effective in meeting those

needs.

Sharing Senior-Year Strategies for Successful Student Transition to Graduation and

Beyond

Joan Leichter Dominick

Associate Professor of Communication, Senior-Year Seminar Course Coordinator

Kennesaw State University

770) 423-6356

[email protected]

Come join the conversation on sharing ―Senior-Year Strategies for Successful Student

Transition to Graduation and Beyond‖. Whether you are in the considering phase,

planning phases, or a have a seasoned program, course, or events for college seniors,

come join the conversation of how you are strategizing your Senior-Year Experience

Transition at your institution. Do you have an institutional class, an institutional

program, deliver your program in a college or departmental capstone, deliver your

program in a career center, have a service-learning program, or are you in the process

of developing a new view of the Senior-Year Experience Transition? Come share your

strategies to get our seniors one day closer to a successful graduation and prepared

for life after college.

Julie Ambrose

Director, The Senior Year Experience

Muhlenberg College

(484) 664-3924

[email protected]

Betty Siegel

President Emeritus

Kennesaw State University

(678) 797-2222

[email protected]

Heather Maietta

Director of Career Services and Cooperative Education

Merrimack College

(978) 837-5038

[email protected]

Online Orientations for Nontraditional and Special Populations Students

Kristine Adzovic

Coordinator, Adult Student Connections

Kishwaukee College

815-825-2086 ext.3430

[email protected]




15

There are four main steps to creating an online orientation. Step 1: Define your

audience and their needs. Knowing the specific needs and barriers of your audience

will help you develop a more meaningful orientation. If you are unsure of your

audience's needs and barriers, ask them. Host student focus groups, interviews, and

surveys to gather qualitative information on what students want to see in the

orientation. Incorporate their suggestions into the planning stages. Consider what

kinds of supports are available on campus and in your community and how you can

relay that information in an online format. Step 2: Identify your capabilities and

resources. Whether you are applying for grant money or using all in-house funds and

services, it is essential to know your budget. Kishwaukee College developed online

orientations on a budget of $2,100. We received full funding from the New Look Grant.

However, some institutions have developed their online orientations for $0 due to the

software already installed on their computers. I would recommend developing an

online orientation with the software Articulate which can be purchased for $699. Ask

different departments on campus what they are able to contribute to the development

of your orientation: video, media, marketing, disability services, counseling,

admissions. This project requires collaboration with key players in your institution.

Step 3: Evaluate and organize your content. It is important to keep research and

information organized when developing the online orientations. Use outlines,

flowcharts, tables, and diagrams to decide how to map the flow of information.

Remember to be clear and concise as too much information may overwhelm new

students. Step 5: Put your data into action. Determine a vendor or the software you

wish to use for your online orientations. If using Articulate, simply enter information

into PowerPoint slides and add quizzes, video, audio narration, diagrams, and much

more. Before making final edits to your orientations, select some students to preview

them. Use their helpful critiques to make changes before going live on your college

website. The rest of the presentation will include taking an in-depth look at the four

online orientations developed by Kishwaukee College. Their titles are: Nontraditional

Student Orientation; Special Information for Single Parents; Special Information for

Students in Nontraditional Occupations; and Special Information for Students with

Disabilities. The audience will see how their students can interact with Articulate

software through the orientations and learn in a vibrant and new way.

The Visible Classroom: Using Action Research to Assess the First Year Seminar

Program

Jesse Kavadlo

Associate Prof., English, and Coordinator, University Seminar Program

Maryville University

314 529 9502

[email protected]

How can instructors—and program coordinators—know whether the goals of their first

year seminars are working? To being to find out, the presenters—all instructors, but

three of whom are also administrators (University Seminar coordinator, Director of the

Center for Academic Success and the First Year Experience, and the Associate Vice

President for Academic Affairs—turned to action research. While much of our goal is, of

course, to improve individual classroom instruction, importantly we also collaborated

in order to anticipate institutional concerns regarding assessment of the program: how

can collective, programmatic (rather than just individual) action research begin to

demonstrate student learning? How can it demonstrate learning in ways that are

16

classroom- and student centered, as opposed to top-down models of assessment? And

how can instructors use different research questions (regarding student writing, in-

class discussions, emerging attitudes, and changing senses of self) relevant to their

differently themed classes (fictional ―secret worlds,‖ spirituality, self-authorship, and

leadership) while still maintaining a sense of coherence and unity? The discussion

draws primarily from the experiences the instructors have had in asking and

answering their research questions through assessing their own teaching, but also the

;larger implications of working together to assess and improve a first year seminar

program.

Jen McCluskey

Associate Vice President


314.529.9561

[email protected]

Tammy Gocial



314.529.6893

[email protected]

Johannes Wich-Schwarz

Assistant Professor, English


314.529.9321

[email protected]

The *New* TLC for Transfer Students

Jennifer McCluskey

Associate VP Academic Affairs. Director, Center for Academic Success & FYE

Maryville University of Saint Louis

314-529-9561

[email protected]

This session will provide attendees with the background for Maryville University’s

recent intensive focus on transfer student success and satisfaction. While we have had

much success with first- to second-year student retention, our efforts until recently

have ignored the transfer student. With TLC as a road map - Thinking About, Listening

To, and Connecting With – I will share the development of initiatives focused on our

transfer students. I will explain how we ―think about‖ transfer students – by age, by

previous institution, by needs/interest. Next I will share our efforts of reaching out to

―listen to‖ transfer students – what can we learn from their previous institutions? How

are we meeting (or not) their expectations? Finally, explain the importance of and

ideas about ―connecting with‖ transfer students by sharing information about

resources, student leadership opportunities, and benefits of involvement. I will

illustrate the retention numbers associated with first- to second-year students as well

as transfer students (although retention is not the critical reason we are focusing on

transfer students). I will provide an explanation of our old and newly designed

orientation program options for transfer students. These changes were developed and

implemented by transfer students themselves. Following this, I will share our detailed

17

communication plan developed for transfer students from their admission through

their first year. We have developed a student employee position in our department

called Transfer Coordinator. Throughout the presentation and especially following the

formal presentation, I will ask attendees to share their strategies for working with the

transfer student population.

Heather Sadi

Graduate Student


314.529.6799

[email protected]

A New Retention Model: The Mercy College PACT

Andy Person

Executive Director, Center for Student Success and Engagement

Mercy College

914-330-1450

[email protected]

In this session, the panel will discuss the Mercy College PACT Program (Personalized

Achievement Contract). As a Federally Designated Hispanic‑Serving College,

we are especially concerned about the changing demographics in our country. As an

aging and well‑educated white population approach retirement, we have a

growing number of younger minority and first-generation students who will be a major

source of new workers. Mercy College has created an innovative and scalable program

to address the critical challenge of low retention and college completion rates,

especially among low income, minority and first‑generation college students.

PACT is an innovator in student success by changing how a college prepares its

students for their careers. Through a ―single point of contact‖ approach, Mercy College

uses professional mentoring to help students achieve their goals. Mentors are assigned

to students at the start of college and work with them through graduation. Mercy

College employs 22 full-time, cross-trained, professional mentors who engage with

students daily –in person, by phone, and online. Mentors know their students and work

with them to customize their path from college through career or graduate school.

PACT complements the traditional college curriculum with mentoring modules in

personal, interpersonal, organizational and career development. The program includes

internships and workshops on topics ranging from public speaking to interviewing to

resume development, as well as an online portfolio component. PACT also cultivates

employer partnerships, internships and mentoring opportunities to give students even

greater access to new opportunities. Over 1500 students are currently enrolled in

PACT, the cornerstone of the personalized learning experience. Through positive

results, Mercy College is building a proven national model for student success. PACT

students at Mercy College persist at over 20% higher retention rate than non-PACT

students. In 2011, Association of American Colleges and Universities recognize Mercy

College’s PACT as their feature program for May, 2011 newsletter. PACT is also

featured as a ―Best Practice‖ for retention and career services by the National

Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE). In our panel discussion, the Executive

Director of the Center for Student Success and Engagement and the Director of PACT

will address the need for measurable goals for increased college completion and a plan

that is succeeding in achieving those goals. The discussion may involve two of our

PACT students based on academic availability.

18

Bogdana Vladescu

Director, PACT

Mercy College

914-674-7697

[email protected]

Our Second Year of the Sophomore Experience

Mike O'Neal

Director, Second Year Programs

Miami University

513-529-4038

[email protected]

Significant results from our assessments include: Second year students made progress

in choosing a major during their second year. Results were statistically significant, p <

05. (.25 difference in pre and post mean) Second year students reported an increase in

their overall sense of satisfaction with their Miami experience. (.04 difference in pre

and post mean) At the end of sophomore year, only Five percent of respondents report

that they are still trying to find campus involvement that matches their interests. At

the start of the year, respondents felt better prepared for the academic and social

transitions than they did at the end of their second year. Academic rigor and balancing

academic and social needs were identified in the pre-test to be the greatest expected

challenges for the year. The post test revealed this to be true, but time management

rose to the top of the list on the post test. ―Your academic advisor‖ was listed as the

resource most used on the post test. This response was rarely listed on the pre-test,

but had the second lowest satisfaction score on the post test. (Satisfaction mean of

3.88) Student’s sense of connection to the faculty in their major increased during their

second year. Results were statistically significant p. < .05. (.36 increase from pre to

post-test) Students’ sense that they play an integral part in the Miami community

increased during the year. Results were statistically significant p. < .05. (.20 change

from pre to post-test)

From Dual-Enrollment to the First-Year: Exploring Your Role in College

Readiness

Ryan Goodwin

Research Assistant

Michigan State University

219-617-6821

[email protected]

The Researcher will begin by identifying the topic and purpose of the study, explaining

the research questions. Then, a brief summary of the research on college readiness,

focusing on explaining the framework (Conley, 2007) used throughout the study, will

be provided. Additionally, the researcher will briefly describe the components of an

Early College High School to give context to the school site. The researcher will then

describe the research methods, including study design, data collection, contextualizing

the school site with background information, and describing the participant profile.

Further, the researcher will describe the data analysis process. The presentation will

19

also include a healthy description of the findings, covering all four college readiness

component areas. Select findings include, (1) Generally positive student experiences in

the ECHS program and strong self-identified levels of college readiness in English and

science preparation; (2) Mixed levels of preparedness in mathematics and social

sciences; (3) Students felt cognitive skills were developed most heavily through

English coursework and project-based learning; (4) Students identified a mix of

academic behaviors and acknowledged a needed change in those behaviors to

successfully transition to being a full-time college student; (5) Students self-reported

high-levels of college knowledge except in the area of financial aid.

Ready or Not, Here We come: Exploring the College Readiness of American

Indians

Ryan Goodwin

Research Assistant


219-617-6821

[email protected]

The researchers will begin by identifying the topic and purpose of the study, explaining

the research questions. Research questions blend the study of college readiness and

the achievement gap, focusing on the educational experiences and achievement of

American Indian/Alaska Native students. They are: 1) What does the current research

say about scholastic achievement of American Indian/Alaskan Native students in

reference to the issues surrounding college readiness?; 2) How does the achievement,

as measured by average GPA, of American Indian/Alaskan Native students, compare

to other racial/ethnic groups?; 3) How has the comparative standing and achievement,

as measured by average GPA, of American Indian/Alaskan Native students, changed

from 1990-2009? The presenters will offer a brief summary of the research on college

readiness, focusing on explaining the framework (Conley, 2007) used throughout the

study. Following, researchers will provide a summary of the high school achievement

of American Indian/Alaska Native students over the past twenty years. Next,

researchers will provide an overview of literature on American Indian education,

focusing specifically on cultural differences and challenges unique to the population.

The researchers will discuss the intersection of both issues, including a healthy

description of the findings. Select findings to be covered include: (1) While the raw

score GPA for American Indian/Alaska Native has risen since 1990, (2) the

comparative standing of American Indian/Alaska Native students in relation to their

peers of different races/ethnicities has changed. (3) By that measure, American

Indian/Alaska Natives are less college ready today than they were in comparison to

their peers 1990. Findings will also include a description of the GPA trend for other

racial/ethnic groups over the same time span. Further, the discussion will compare the

rigor of college coursework among distinct groups. Finally, data will be juxtaposed to

the sociocultural ideas and challenges explicated in the literature on American Indian

education.

Christie Poitra

Doctoral Student


530-410-4867

[email protected]


20

Cultural and Academic Enrichment Strategies for Community College

Transfers

Amy Pardo

Associate Professor of English

Mississippi University for Women

205-758-6835

[email protected]

Because of current trends in unemployment in rural states, an emerging movement for

a four year university is the adult learner who has finished his or her general

education classes at a convenient, and in Mississippi, free community college, and now

transfers to a four year university without benefit of understanding the culture of

higher academia. This student has not had the advantages of an enrichment that takes

place in the freshmen and sophomore years or during an introduction to college life

class. Criteria for choosing is usually based on geographic convenience and financial

aid and not the values of the institution which can create a great deal of dissonance

within the student who can only draw upon his or her own past experiences that will

likely give little help. Likewise, university faculty are now finding transitional students

in their upper-level courses who are eager to successfully learn but have no context

for doing so. Thus, bridging the gap between student need and expectation from

faculty must be a priority for a public university to meet its responsibilities. This

session will explore three ways to create a positive transitional learning environment

that serves both the community college transfer student and the faculty within an

informal surrounding rather than a classroom setting. Using casual teaching/learning

sessions, faculty interactions and student mentors in a three prong approach aids

these transitional students who often do not realize they are in need until a negative

outcome has taken place. Mandatory transition classes have failed to produce results

simply because of the resentment from the junior-level student who does not yet

comprehend how steep the learning curve will be and the resentment of faculty

required to teach transition classes in the place of their specialty area. Few tenured

faculty attended community colleges and are often not aware of or sympathetic

towards these learners in a way that they can empathize with freshmen. Thus, this

discussion has been designed with the focus of creating a bond amongst major faculty,

traditional students and transfer students outside the traditional

classroom.

JumpSTART to Success: Summer Bridge Program for Conditionally-Admitted

Students

Tracey Glaessgen

Academic Advisor

Missouri State University

417-836-5258

[email protected]

At Missouri State University, we are currently implementing a new summer bridge

program (JumpSTART—Summer Transition and Academic Readiness Training) for our

conditionally-admitted, at risk, first-semester students. Though we have previously

allowed conditionally-admitted students the opportunity to attend classes during the

summer, and then, with good academic standing, allowed them to continue for fall,


21

there was no university-wide initiative until this summer. The purpose of JumpSTART

is to challenge these students with a rigorous course load in a supportive environment

that brings together academic resources, co-curricular activities, and, overall, student

involvement. With planning meetings and emails, faculty have communicated

important deadlines in their classes (such as essays and tests) to residence hall

directors and student engagement staff to ensure compatibility with co-curricular and

student engagement activities. Further academic resources have also been included in

the planning meetings and communication to coordinate services. The session will

focus on an overall description of the program through planning stages to

implementation followed by initial assessment results. Presenters will share

suggestions for implementing a summer bridge program along with a handout listing

the required activities. Participants will have the opportunity to interact with the

presenters.

Susan Martindale

Academic Advisor


417-836-5258

[email protected]

Mike Wood

Director, First-Year Programs


417-836-8343

[email protected]

Vision 2020, Student Success Program: AP/IB Alternative and CTE Dual

Enrollment

Tom Spillman

Dean of Counseling and Student Support Services

Mt. San Jacinto College

951-639-5250

[email protected]

The Dual Enrollment Program is a critical strategy for increasing college-going rates

among local high school students through highly coordinated partnerships between

local high school districts and Mt. San Jacinto College. This program provides students

with an opportunity to complete CSU and UC transferable units and career/technical

coursework prior to transitioning from high school to a post-secondary institution.

Students entering college following participation in the Dual Enrollment Program are

better prepared for the rigors of college coursework, and have an opportunity to

complete the majority of their freshman level credit towards a college degree. Dual

Enrollment eases the transition from high school to college which promotes student

retention and achievement. Rigorous data collection and assessment ensure the

program is running at maximum effectiveness. The California educational system

spends millions of dollars re-educating students unnecessarily. MSJC’s innovative Dual

Enrollment Program provides a cost-neutral solution to post-secondary impaction and

maintains college level standards by requiring that high school DE instructors meet

California Community College Faculty Minimum Qualifications. High School DE faculty

work within their regular high school district contract, while teaching community

college curriculum. Enrollment in DE courses is open to both high school and

22

community college students, which allows for the college and high school districts to

claim student apportionment. This Dual Enrollment concept is unique because high

school faculty teach college level coursework to qualified high school students. The

Dual Enrollment program is meeting the 2020 Vision for the nation and for California,

making our students globally competitive.

Shartelle Fears

Counselor Coordinator


951-672-6752

[email protected]

Susie Ho

Title V Student Success Coordinator


951-672-6752

[email protected]

Advances in Research and Practice: The Career Development of Students in

Transition

Paul Gore

Associate Professor

University of Utah, Saint Louis University, North Carolina State University; Grossmont-

Cuyamaca Community College

801-581-7233

[email protected]

This panel presentation will offer participants a glimpse of the content of a recently

published monograph from the National Resource Center - Monograph 55: Students in

Transition: Research and Practice in Career Development. This monograph was

published to provide readers with evidence supporting the effectiveness of a range of

programs and services designed to promote college student career development.

Participants will learn about recent advances in career development research –

including the identification of 5 critical ingredients in career education. This

presentation will be followed by presentations describing (a) a career development

program for students during their high school to college transition (Saint Louis

University), (b) a program to assist first-year college students adopt a functional

career decision-making model (North Carolina State University), and (c) the

incorporation of career development content and process in a first-year college

success course (Cuyamaca Community College).

Leanna Fenneberg

Assistant Vice President, Student Development

Saint Louis University

314-977-2805

[email protected]

Marsha Fralick

Counselor and Personal Development Instructor

Cuyamaca College

619-660-4432

23

[email protected]

Carrie McLean

Executive Director, First Year College

North Carolina State University

919-515-8497

[email protected]

Donna Burton

Assistant Director, First year College

North Carolina State University

919-515-6288

[email protected]

Effective Orientation for Transfer Students: Establishing Pathways for Transfer Student

Success

Janet Marling

Director, Program Development and Strategic Initiatives

National Institute for the Study of Transfer Students/University of North

Texas

940.300.7553

[email protected]

The session will follow chapter content included in ―Effective Orientation for Transfer

Students: Establishing Pathways for Transfer Student Success,‖ (Poisel, M. A., &

Joseph, S. [Eds]., 2010. Transfer Students in Higher Education: Building a Rationale for

Policies, Programs, and Services that Foster Student Success, The National Resource

Center for the First Year Experience and Students in Transition, Monograph). Modified

for time constraints, the session will be broken into four content areas, including (a)

creating a foundation for transfer orientation, (b) program development, (c)

communicating with transfer students, and (d) program assessment. Creating a

Foundation for Transfer Orientation will include discussions related to program and

campus climate self-assessment, partnering with Institutional Research to obtain an

accurate transfer population portrait, and engaging campus and external stakeholders

in the planning process. Program Development will explore the importance of

grounding the orientation program in national standards for orientation programming,

mandatory vs. optional programming, determining the most appropriate on-campus

and online program formats, and creating program goals and learning outcomes.

Communicating with Transfer Students focuses on creating a balance between transfer

students’ previous and current collegiate experiences, evaluating printed and virtual

materials to ensure desired messages are being communicated and tailored to the

population, reviewing the content of orientation presentations, and preparing

orientation presenters to address transfer students. Program Assessment addresses

the most important, yet often overlooked aspect of orientation planning. Examples of

assessment tools and protocol will be examined. All facets of the session will rely upon

a dynamic interface between the audience and presenters. While pragmatic

suggestions will be offered, participants will be encouraged to offer examples of

successful practices to complement the session content. Participants will also be

provided with a checklist that mirrors the session content and will be encouraged to

record 1-3 ideas for exploration/implementation, as well as the name of at least one

contact who can serve as a resource in the change process.

24

Designing Institutional Services for Enhancing Student Veteran Success

Mark Allen Poisel

Associate Provost for Student Success

Pace University

212-346-1208

[email protected]

This session is designed for the practitioner who really wants to create or revise the

institution’s veterans’ services to enhance the student experience for returning

veterans to focus on transitions, student success, retention, and graduation.

Participants hear about the trends around the U.S. and examples of what institutions

around the country are doing to develop or enhance the services for this special, ever

increasing population of students. The main discussion of the presentation will center

on the components and services that should be included as resources for student

veterans. Different models will be discussed to include actual veteran centers,

specialized programs, and institutional support services specifically designed around

the unique needs of veterans. The session will include a discussion about the

importance and building of partnerships on and off campus to develop meaningful

networks for professionals and veterans that will provide support for veteran success

in and out of the classroom. As many of the returning veterans to college and

university campuses are likely to be returning adults and transfers, a discussion will

also be included in regarding to collaborative efforts that combine the needs of adult

students, transfers, and veterans into programs and services. Participants will be

asked to brainstorm the needs on their campuses and share examples of how they

might incorporate these services into their existing services for all students. Ideas will

be shared and assistance provided to help them work on an action plan for next steps

at their institution. Some of the goals for the session include 1) understanding the

trends for increased veteran student enrollment in the United States, including first

time in college and transfer students; 2) determining and understanding the strategic

needs of veteran students on campuses; and 3) developing a resource list of services

that could be incorporated on campus without additional financial

resources.

Doing More with Less: The evolution of a peer mentoring program

Jenna Seabold

Senior Assistant Director of Student Access, Transition and Success Programs and

Coordinator of Purdue Promise

Purdue University

765-494-6357

[email protected]

The presentation will consist of 4 sections: Background, Program Overview,

Assessment, Implications & Replication. In the Background section presenters will

discuss national trends related to college access and support initiatives as well as

financial barriers currently facing institutions of higher education. In addition research

on the challenges facing low-income college students will also be presented. Once a

thorough research background has been established the presenters will discuss the

history and evolution of the Purdue Promise peer-mentoring program. During this

25

Program Overview section, the presenters will discuss the learning objectives of the

mentoring program, how the program is structured, and how that structure has

evolved. When discussing the structure the program, presenters will elaborate on how

budgetary restrictions shaped the program and the lessons learned from those

structural changes. This will include the differences between one-to-one mentoring,

group mentoring, and team mentoring. The presenters will discuss how recruitment,

training, supervision, and activities are sponsored with a limited budget. Following the

overview of the Purdue Promise mentoring program presenters will provide data that

indicates that the mentoring program is making a difference in the retention of

Purdue’s low-income student population. In this Assessment section, retention data,

information from mentor contact reports, and focus group responses will be given. It is

from this assessment data that the mentor program has evolved. Presenters will talk

about how this data was used to make structural changes. To wrap-up the

presentation the last section will focus on Implications & Replication. During this

section presenters will give suggestions on how to be creative within the restrictions

of a limited budget. This will also be a time largely dedicated to questions from the

audience. Based on those questions the presenters can provide specific advice on how

to build, change, and support an effective peer-mentoring program.

Emily Smedick

Assistant Director of Student Access, Transition and Success Programs

Purdue University

765-494-8552

[email protected]

Sophomore Students in Transition: Understanding and Improving the Second-Year

Learning Community

Linnette Good

Assistant Director, Science Diversity

Purdue University-West Lafayette

765-496-6095

[email protected]

The Women in Science Program at Purdue University has been successful in developing

retention strategies that increase the number of women majoring in science and has

been able to demonstrate this success. Research also shows that first year students

are more likely to be retained when involved in activities that support the first year of

college. Information obtained from evaluations show comprehensive programs that

integrate multiple strategies that are beneficial as they address women’s needs.

Among a few of the topics that were shared include an understanding in the field of

science and its practice, providing a sense of identity, increasing self-confidence, and

academic and social engagement. The Women in Science Program is just one avenue

for young women, specifically in the field of science, to connect and bond with other

young women. This session will highlight the Women in Science Programs

achievements at Purdue University over a seven year time span within the freshmen

learning community. In addition, the session will emphasize strategies implemented

within the last two years that have increased the enrollment of participants in the

program and the creation of the universities first Sophomore Learning Community. The

WISP participants have an advantage that other learning communities on campus are

not privy as a part of their experience. The sophomore community adds an element in

bridging the gaps between the first and second years of college. In addition, the

26

incorporation of research based knowledge and service learning projects. The

increased interest in WISP has been a tremendous benefit to engaging women

students in the field of science. Thereby, adding to the retention of female students in

the sciences. The data obtained through assessments and research of this population

of students will be shared with participants. In addition, data from the first year

experience of the sophomore community will be shared. A discussion of the program,

its components and perspectives that make this program attractive to incoming

students will be shared. A correlation of the success and failures among other colleges

and universities with programs such as the one at Purdue University in the sciences

will be discussed. Also, in this session participants will be able to interact and share

their thoughts and strategies regarding programs in which they are apart or aware in

the same field. By attending this session, participants will be able to gain knowledge of

how to grow an existing program, encourage young women to remain in the field of

science or any STEM and to develop a sophomore learning community with their

current network of students.

The Use of Service Learning to Assist Sophomore Students with Integration of

Concepts of Professionalism

Ginge Kettenbach

Associate Professor


314-977-8543 or 314-495-8827 (cell)

[email protected]

Information on the sophomore transition is somewhat sparse, with studies implying

that sophomore persistence is positively influenced by student engagement in

collaborative learning, classroom discussions and teacher contact. Students studying

to be health professionals frequently are expected to incorporate the values and

behavioral norms of their anticipated profession into their behaviors. These

expectations are difficult for sophomore students to fulfill because they are not into

the clinical phase of their professional programs. Sophomore students in the health

professions can become disengaged with their academic program, choice of profession

and academic institution. Saint Louis University has sophomore transition programs

such as sophomore housing options, programs offered by Career Services in the

residence halls, and student engagement with both a faculty mentor and professional

academic advisor. In addition to these programs, the Program in Physical Therapy has

attempted to engage sophomore students with each other through collaborative

learning in the sophomore Student Development III and IV classes. Students are

introduced to professional values and behavior expectations for physical therapy

students. The Student Development IV course is a service learning course and

students are asked to set goals for professional behavior as part of their service

learning contract. Students reflect on their service experiences and their professional

values and behavior at the beginning, middle and end of their service learning

experience. Specific questions for reflection ask students to integrate the information

they have learned with their actual experiences in the community. Students also

prepare a group presentation for the class that integrates the concepts learned in class

with their service learning experiences. The group presentations are followed with

individual final papers addressing how students personally used the concepts of

professionalism and professional behavior learned in class during their service

learning experiences. Assessment of the use of service learning to integrate concepts

of professionalism was done by teacher perception of student integration during in-

27

class group presentations, by course evaluation results and by student retention rate.

In the course presentations, all students described use of professional values and

behaviors during their service learning experiences. . Student course evaluations were

favorable. Only 1 out of 83 students (1.2%) did not persist in the physical therapy

program from sophomore fall to junior fall. This resulted in a 98.8% retention rate at

the sophomore level. The retention rate sophomore fall to junior fall prior to the

initiation of service learning was 88.2%.

Explore Ways to Build Transition Programs Beyond the First-Year

Susan Fanale

Director for the Student Involvement Center


314-977-1587

[email protected]

The session will begin with a brief introduction of the presenters and share our

learning outcomes of the presentation. The learning outcomes are as follows –

program participants will: learn about Saint Louis University's comprehensive four

year transition plan for students that includes the First-Year Experience, the

Sophomore/Junior-Experience, and the Senior-Year Experience; understand lessons

learned as SLU developed transition programs; understand the importance of

collaboration and partnerships in transition programs; and learn about transition

programs at various institutions from other session participants We will then provide

an overview of Saint Louis University, including a brief description of the university

population and of the organizational structure. We will outline the primary programs

of the First-Year Experience: SLU 101 Summer Orientation, Welcome Week,

TRANSFERmations Program, Freshman Commuter Programs, University 101 courses,

SLU Inquiry courses, Learning Communities and First-Year Interest Groups, academic

advising, major & career exploration, involvement & leadership, paraprofessional

mentors The presentation will then provide information about SLU’s

Sophomore/Junior – Year Experience which includes: Bright Ideas Grants, Live Your

Vocation dinner, Last Lecture Program, Beyond the Lecture Series, Job shadowing,

internship assistance, career fairs, study abroad reunion, Engaged Service Program.

We will review the SLU Senior-Year Experience programs including: Senior Legacy

Symposium, Senior Reception with the Jesuits, Senior mailings/communications,

online resources, career preparation, class celebration events, Leadership & Service

awards, and Commencement activities After reviewing our programs, we will discuss

the steps taken to get where we are, including the development of divisional transition

learning outcomes for each year of a student’s undergraduate experience. We will

address university partners and committees that were integral to the implementation

and success of the programs. We will note the branding and marketing of our

programs and address future goals. We will also cover some important lessons learned

throughout the process. We will also discuss transition programs for specific student

audiences such as freshman commuters, transfer students, international students,

first-generation college students, students of color, and family transition programs.

We will ask attendees to break up into small groups and discuss the creative transition

programs they are doing on their campuses and also discuss what student needs are

not currently being met. Groups will be asked to share key discussion point with other

attendees. We will then close with a question and answer period for the audience to

ask the presenters questions or to ask their questions so the general audience can

respond.

28

Susan Krieg

Coordinator for the Student Involvement Center


314-977-1570

[email protected]

Student Engagement through Living/Learning Programs

Susan Fanale



314-977-1587

[email protected]

The roundtable will explore current and future residential academic initiatives.

Attendees will be able to share what they offer at their university regarding

living/learning programs along with academic connections for these programs. The

program will allow for the group to explore how implementing these programs can

impact or change existing structures such as housing assignment systems, staff

recruitment/selection, staff training and expectations, budget and other resources

allocated to the program. The group will discuss the purpose of their programs and

what they are trying to achieve and how they overcame obstacles in implementing the

programs. The roundtable will explore academic connections for these living/learning

programs and how the schools present went about to develop the academic/faculty

connections to the programs. Schools can discuss the variety of options available for

these academic connections whether they offer courses in common, co-enrollment

options, other course component for the residential learning programs, or faculty in

residence programs. The group will discuss identifying key partners to consider in

building the program such as academic advising, academic departments, registrar,

admissions and enrollment management, Institutional Research, Provost Office and

other key administrators on campus to integrate academic courses into living/learning

programs. The roundtable will address identified challenges and suggested solutions

on implementing programs to engage students around academic initiatives. The group

will discuss resources needed to implement and sustain these types of programs as

well as discuss best practices for collaborating across the campus. The group will

share ideas for marketing and communicating internally and externally to a variety of

audiences. The roundtable will allow the group to discuss assessment opportunities

and different methods to measure success and learning outcomes. The program will

also be flexible and allow the attendees to help set topics that they would like to

explore based on their interests and campus needs.

Elizabeth Niebruegge

Coordinator for the Student Involvement Center


314-977-1585

[email protected]

Introducing the Senior Legacy Symposium to promote reflection and professional

preparation for seniors

29

Shelley Sawalich

Director, Academic Support


314-977-2801

[email protected]

The Senior Legacy Symposium is an annual celebration of outstanding senior student

work at Saint Louis University, which began in 2008. The program promotes

experiential learning, scholarly work, and the advancement of knowledge, and the

reflection upon and articulation of these experiences. Seniors presenting at the

Symposium reflect upon their learning in relation to the Five Dimensions (Scholarship

& Knowledge, Intellectual Inquiry & Communication, Community Building, Leadership

& Service, and Spirituality and Values ) of the Saint Louis University experience

(student learning outcomes-focused areas of growth/development). Presentations are

often a culmination of a discipline-based experience such as an internship, research

project or capstone course. Three senior projects from each academic department are

selected by their department chair to represent the department at a campus-wide

event. Students display their presentation in the form of a poster presentation, oral

presentation or creative performance, in a professional conference presentation

setting with faculty, staff, administrators and students. Reception to the program at

SLU has been outstanding – a true connection and cooperation between Academic

Affairs and Student Development. Students have the opportunity to ―connect the dots‖

between their academic work, their passions, and their future all while honing their

skills of public presentation. The poster presentation will include I. Purpose and

history of SLU’s Senior Legacy Symposium II. Details of program coordination;

considerations for other campuses III. Assessment findings for student participants

IV. Event artifacts including program, advertising, photographs and video

http://www.slu.edu/x19363.xml

Leanna Fenneberg

Assistant Vice President, Student Development


314-977-2806

[email protected]

Diversity and Inclusion through Transition Programs and Initiatives

LaTanya Buck

Program Director for the Cross Cultural Center


314-977-2110

[email protected]

The roundtable will explore how to build programs that develop students’ multicultural

competence through each transition period during college (First-Year Experience,

Sophomore/Junior-Year Experience, and Senior-Year Experience) and how to create

learning outcomes and objective that includes ―the awareness, knowledge, and skills

needed to work with others who are culturally different from self in meaningful,

relevant, and productive ways‖ (Pope, Reynolds, & Mueller, 2004, p. 13). Attendees

will be able to share what they offer at their university regarding diversity and

inclusion initiatives. The group will explore how implementing these programs can

impact or change existing initiatives such as traditional transition programs, staff

30

recruitment/selection, staff training and expectations, budget and other resources

allocated to the programs. The group will discuss the purpose of their programs, what

they are trying to achieve and how they overcame obstacles in implementing their

initiatives. The roundtable will explore academic connections for diversity and

inclusion programs and how the attendees developed academic/faculty partnerships.

Institutions can also discuss how they developed transition programs that aid in the

retention of underrepresented groups and assist in contributing to a diverse and

inclusive campus environment. The group will discuss identifying key stakeholders to

consider in building initiatives that educate and/or retain students. The roundtable will

address identified challenges and suggested solutions on implementing programs to

engage students around diversity and social justice issues. The group will discuss

resources needed to implement and sustain the programs as well as discuss best

practices for collaborating across the campus. The roundtable will also discuss

assessment opportunities and different methods to measure success and learning

outcomes. The program will be flexible and allow the attendees to help set topics that

they would like to explore based on their interests and campus needs.

Susan Fanale



314-977-1587

[email protected]

Addressing professional transitions while working with students in transition

Lindsey Taucher

Advising Specialist

St. Edward's University

512.428.1265

[email protected]

We plan to begin the session with a brief overview of our personal models for advising,

teaching and school liaison work at St. Edward’s University and how they have

changed as we’ve moved through our own transitions within our institution.

Facilitators will also use their own relationship as an example of supporting colleagues

through transitions in the workplace. Attendees will then participate in a conversation

of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs and how it may be applied to higher education. The

bulk of the session will focus on an individual creative project. Here, audience

members will participate in an exercise which will assist them in developing a physical

reminder of their own professional mission statement or mantra as it can fit in with

their campus’s expectations. As time allows, session participants will share methods

and interventions that already do or could contribute to their own campus excellence.

Participants will be invited to share their work and ideas with the larger group. Upon

session completion, participants will leave with a small physical reminder of this

transition to excellence for their daily work in the office. Presenters will also bring

items to distribute to the participants as tokens of encouragement and to remind

educators of the seminar objectives after they return to their offices.

Kimberly Livingstone

Assistant to the Dean

St. Edward's University

512-416-5809

31

[email protected]

Career Consultation in the Classroom: An Outcome Study on the Effects of Combining a

Career Course with Graduate Student-led Career Consultation

Rodney Parks

Associate Registrar

The University of Georgia

706-542-8762

[email protected]

The qualitative results of this study revealed an overwhelmingly positive experience among

students enrolled in the dual intervention course. Both qualitative and quantitative results

suggest a need for further research investigating the reasons students elect to register for an

academic and career planning course.

Yvette Getch

Associate Professor

University of Georgia

706-542-1685

[email protected]

Discussing What Works: Challenges and Opportunities in Making Second-Year

programs successful

Jimmie Gahagan

Director, Office of Student Engagement

The University of South Carolina

803.777.1445

[email protected]

The University of South Carolina began their sophomore-year programs in the 2004-

2005 academic year and in the seven years since that starting point we have

experienced a number of successes and failures in regards to obtaining student and

institutional buy-in, developing resources to support second-year students, and

promoting sophomore student success. However, at the same time changes in

institutional leadership, changing student demographics, the financial crisis, along

with other issues have also impacted the growth of sophomore-year experience at

USC. Current research and literature continues confirm that second-year students have

unique developmental needs, but the question remains, how can we build a more

sustainable sophomore year experience on our campuses? This session will begin with

a review of the literature, highlighting works that have been done in recent years

examining the issues that sophomore students face. Discussion will then move into the

findings that were recently published in fall 2010 from the National Resource Center

for the First-Year Experience and Students in Transition on the 2008 National Survey

of Sophomore Year Initiatives. Following the overview of common initiatives, guided

discussion will begin on what participants’ experiences have been at their own

institutions. Through a series of small group and large group discussions, the following

questions will be examined: - How do you define success for your sophomore-year

experience? - What programs have been most successful in reaching second-year

students? - What challenges or obstacles have you faced in meeting the needs of

32

sophomores on your campus? - What types of partnerships and institutional support

are needed to make these programs successful? How do you gain institutional support

for your SYE? - What are the most successful ways to reach sophomore students on

your campus through either active or passive events? - How do you assess your

sophomore-year experience?

Kimberly Dressler

Coordinator, Office of Student Engagement

The University of South Carolina

803.777.2142

[email protected]

Forming, Storming, Norming and Performing: Collaboration and First-Year

Cornerstone

Deirdre Bucher Heistad

Liberal Arts Core Director

University of Northern Iowa

319-273-2633

[email protected]

During the first part of our presentation called ―Forming‖ we will discuss how we

moved from our Foundations of Excellence self-study project to actually implementing

a 6 credit hour, yearlong course that have been approved by the faculty for inclusion

into our general education curriculum. Many questions had to be addressed during this

initial phase of course development. Not only did faculty question the academic

integrity of the course, but also wondered who could teach a course that included

emphases on oral communication, writing, a ―common read‖ and college transition

issues. After a small group of faculty drafted a course proposal and received approval

from the necessary faculty bodies, a call went out inviting faculty from all colleges on

campus to apply to teach the course. While there may have been a bit of ―storming‖

during the first stages of our Cornerstone implementation, the atmosphere became all

the more interesting once a diverse group of seasoned faculty members began working

on the common syllabus for the course. Ten faculty members from a wide variety of

departments worked alongside 10 librarians and 10 representatives from Student

Affairs. While the goals and outcomes of the course had been developed and approved

by the First-Year Council, virtually all of the course development work took place

during a four week summer workshop focusing in general terms on the following: best

practices and engaged learning for first year students; the teaching and grading of

writing; the benefits of choosing integrated communication; the creation of common

rubrics; and assessment. As the faculty selected textbooks and created common

assignments, it became clear that this type of collaborative project had to include a lot

of processing to be sure that the end result remained true to course goals and

outcomes The assessment data collected during this faculty development workshop

will be shared during this session. This year 250 students will take Cornerstone. We

will track these students in order to measure their success as a distinct group as well

as in relationship to other student populations. Our assessment plan includes the use

of an electronic portfolio and will depend heavily on the use of common rubrics, self-

reflection, journaling and blogging, pre/post testing and self-reporting (i.e. MAP-

Works). The information gained from closing the loop on our assessment plan will in

all likelihood take us through the process of ―forming, storming, norming and

performing‖ once again.

33

April Chatham-Carpenter

Professor and Co-Chair of FoE and 1st Year Council


319-273-5901

[email protected]

Michael Licari

Associate Provost of Academic Affairs


319-273-2518

[email protected]

Promoting faculty-student co-learning when students take over self-transition

unsupported by faculty

Suki Ekaratne

Senior Academic Staff Developer

University of Bath

01225-383236

[email protected]

The session aims to enrich audience experiences by sharing practices in effecting

student transition learning-needs changes and in meeting attendant challenges within

the university faculty structure, where facilitating faculty buy-in is necessary to bring

about improvements. To trigger this experiential sharing, we will begin by showcasing

our findings on what transpired when student transition learning needs remained

unmet, arising from incompatibilities across the different transiting learning

environments of high school to university; how students initiated pre-exam learning-

remediation classes by enlisting peers to conduct them - strategically addressing their

immediate need to pass semester-end exams. We will invite the audience to discuss

other similar student-identified initiatives and how they were, or can be, improved by

integration within a format involving shared faculty input. We will showcase, and have

the audience build on, our survey findings on faculty concerns with regard to the five-

year average of a low 2.88 GPA with the student-led learning-remediation classes in

place, reflecting that the emerged interventionist student-led training remained sub-

optimal when faculty training support was lacking. We will discuss and share how such

data can be utilized to lever faculty to perceive that student-led teaching could remain

only a strategic student approach that will not satisfy institution, faculty and student

higher education aspirations, unless faculty undertake inputs, such as facilitating

training student-peers on good pedagogic practice. We will facilitate audience

members to identify improving teaching culture and practice for student transition

within the remit of student-peers, by using deconstructions of video footage of peer-

led teaching sessions we analyzed. We will also generate and share discussion on

practices easing student transition by profiling the active learning methods and

drawbacks that students identified for facilitating their transition. Audience members

will be invited to discuss and share how such teaching-learning practices can be

embedded in formalized course structures, in the light of how our faculty sample

resisted this even on perceiving that the peer-led classes furnished only the immediate

―examination passing‖ student-need, and student-identified drawbacks. We will share

ways on how faculty can be motivated by getting them to perceive their opportunities

to improve GPAs and subject learning by transforming peer-led teaching, as well as

34

their own teaching, towards a deeper learning approach. We will dip into literature to

illustrate the above such as Kuh (2001); Pascarella (2001); Hirschy and Wilson

(2002); Gibbs and Coffey (2004); Upcraft, Barefoot and Gardner (2005); Hunter

(2006); Tinto (2007); Biggs and Tang (2007).

Shrinika Weerakoon

Senior Lecturer

University of Colombo

[email protected]

Saliya De Silva

Senior Lecturer

University of Peradeniya

[email protected]

Now What? Putting Senior Transition Research into Practice

April Perry

Ph.D. Candidate

University of Canterbury

405.225.3911

[email protected]

It is important that we, as practitioners, develop transition preparation and support

initiatives for students based on our knowledge and experiences with them. However,

it would much better if we implemented transition initiatives based on what they, the

students and graduates, are saying they want and need. This has been the focus of my

research study – to explore the experiences and perspectives of students in the midst

of the post-university transition. And from that information, gain insight into what

institutions can do to better support, prepare, and train their students for life after

college. In the research process, there are three practical questions a researcher must

ask themselves: ―What?‖ (What is the issue under investigation?), ―So What?‖ (So

what are you doing to research this issue?), and ―Now What?‖ (Now that you have

done the research, what are you going to do with the findings?). This roundtable

discussion will primarily focus on the ―Now What‖ of the research implications. The

motive is to not only deliver the findings of my research study, but gain insight from

the group about practical initiatives to support our students and graduates as they

transition from the university into the workforce. This discussion will be divided into

three basic parts: First, a brief recap of my study and findings on the post-university

transition. Second, a group brainstorm of the research findings and practical ways to

implement support initiatives. In this, session attendees will be asked to share what

they have implemented at their university, any research they have conducted (formally

or informally) at their campus, and any implications they may have for practice. Third,

we will discuss the other parties that often contribute to ―how‖ we move forward with

our transition support initiatives. In this, we will discuss administration buy-in, faculty

confidence, and funding acquisition. Often times, our ideas do not come to fruition due

to the lack of proper knowledge, research, and buy-in from other university

stakeholders. Framed by my research findings, we will brainstorm on how to achieve

these aspects, and thus take our initiatives beyond conversation and move them into

action.

35

Promoting Values Education at a Large Metropolitan University

Charlene Stinard

Director, Transfer and Transition Services

University of Central Florida

407-823-2231

[email protected]

The University of Central Florida, second largest university in the US, has made a

commitment to inculcate a set of institutional values, the UCF CREED, making them

relevant and an important aspect of student life. With a robust commitment to access

for transfer students from the Florida community college system, UCF enrolls more

than 10,000 new transfers each academic year. The Transfer and Transition Services

(TTS) office is responsible for promoting transfers’ academic preparation, successful

transition, and progress to graduation. Through a model Peer Mentor Program, TTS

also fosters student engagement and promotes inculcation of the five values of the

UCF Creed: Integrity, Scholarship, Community, Excellence, and Creativity. Peer

Mentors portray for new transfers the relevance of these core values to student

success. We will discuss the relevance of values education to student engagement, and

show the incorporation of values in programming for transfer students supports

undergraduate student success. The UCF CREED video, created by the TTS Peer

Mentors reaches out to students on a personal level and enhances their understanding

of and commitment to the CREED values, as well as showing how a commitment to an

ethical framework enhances their undergraduate experience. The students’ CREED

video communicates the need to not only be a better and successful student, but also

to be a thoughtfully ethical person. We will show the UCF CREED video created by our

Peer Mentors during the presentation, and share data supporting the benefits the

CREED has had on the UCF campus community. We will demonstrate the importance of

inculcating the CREED values to the new incoming students. At each orientation, the

Creed video is shown to all of the incoming students, and each student is encouraged

to become involved in civic engagement, uphold a sense of integrity in the academic

world in addition to the personal lives, and to be the best possible student. We will

share a bibliography of research results connecting student involvement to student

success.

The Conditional Admission Program: Providing Opportunities For "at Risk" Students To

Have Access to Higher Education

Jonathan Long

Learning Strategies Coordinator

University of Central Missouri

660-543-8716

[email protected]

Assessment of Learning Communities such as CAP have shown significant success for

"at risk" students who show academic promise but do not meet admissions criteria.

First, to provide initial information about the program, presenters will guide

participants through a general description of the CAP program, how it is implemented

and the level in which the program promotes student success, diversity on-campus and

an increase in access to higher education. Second, statistical data will reinforce the

growing success of the program, and the variables that can be attributed to that

success. Third, participants will have an opportunity to ask questions about CAP and

36

share information about similar programs they have at their institutions.

A Community of Firsts

Tim Foutz

Professor of Biological and Agricultural Engineering


(706) 583-0567

[email protected]

In Fall 2011 the University of Georgia will launch the First- Year Odyssey (FYO)

seminar program. All first-year students will be required to take an FYO seminar, all of

which will be taught by faculty members and built around the scholarly interests of the

given faculty member. A major goal of this program is to expose first-year students to

the role of a faculty member in the university community while also encouraging

quality the interaction between teacher and student that has been shown to have a

positive effect on students’ remaining college years. While some of the faculty

participating in the FYO program will have experience teaching first-year students,

some faculty will be many years removed from teaching this population. Among other

forms of support that UGA is providing for this program, there will be a faculty learning

community centered around the first instructors of this program in its inaugural

semester. One of the major goals for this group will be to review the characteristics of

today’s first-year students and educate ourselves on the pedagogical techniques that

are most effective for that population. Research shows that the mindset of today’s

first-year learner is quite different from that of the average professor, even a newly-

minted professor. Our goal will be to acquaint ourselves with the identity of these

young learners and to shape our teaching methods accordingly. Another goal of the

program is to teach first-year students the importance of being an active learner. To

do so many faculty will need to recall what it means to be an active learner and how to

encourage that behavior in our students. This faculty learning community will provide

faculty with several opportunities to hear from experts on how to teach active learning

skills. The participants in this group represent various disciplines and are motivated by

different needs and interests related to teaching their FYO seminar. The

interdisciplinary of the group will be its greatest asset. We will see how the same

goals for active learning can be accomplished in different ways across disciplines. In

this faculty learning community we will assist each other in meeting our individual

goals while we strive to meet the goals of the larger institutional initiative. The

product we are aiming for is valuable information and informed, successful

pedagogical practices that can be shared with future generations of FYO

faculty.

Leslie Gordon

Assistant to the Vice President for Instruction


706-542-0427

[email protected]

STARS - Addressing the needs of at-risk first-year students through a living-learning

community

Tarah Sweeting-Trotter

37

Academic Advisor, Instructor, First Year Seminar Coordinator

University of Illinois at Springfield

217-206-7471

[email protected]

Our presentation will focus on the development and construction of what we now call

our STARS (Students Transitioning for Academic Retention and Success) program. In

its second year, STARS is a focused retention initiative developed to help at-risk

students achieve academic success and to ensure their continuation at UIS (University

of Illinois at Springfield). Our STARS students are engaged in a living-learning

community, where they are housed together in our residence hall. This piece allows for

specific programming pieces to facilitate their transition to UIS during their first year.

These programming pieces are constructed and implemented through the collaboration

of our Undergraduate Academic Advising office and our Residence Life office.

Programming is co-developed by these two areas, then implemented by a combination

of RA’s, Peer Advisors, First Year Seminar student facilitators, and myself, who acts as

the coordinator for this program. Through consistent one-on-one contact, we monitor

student needs in order to construct effective programming that supports a smooth

academic and social transition to UIS. The living-learning piece of the STARS program

is further facilitated by our First Year Seminar, which encompasses all STARS students

in one section, taught an academic advisor, and again, individually modified to meet

the specific needs of this student population. Students are immediately grounded

within a community both in their residence hall and in the course, drawing a strong

foundation for continued community engagement and, of course, retention. Also,

students in the STARS section of our FYS, are also academically advised by their

instructor, which gives them the unique opportunity to be in weekly and regular

contact with their academic advisor. As such, the program allows advisors to be aware

of issues a student may be experiencing more quickly, and allows that advisor to

identify both academic and social ―red flags‖ in a timely manner, allowing for faster,

more focused interventions. This ―homegrown‖ program works in conjunction with a

number of other campus departments and technological tools to help promote student

success and retention. We hope to be able to increase the number of students to which

we are able to offer this service in the near future. We feel it is an effective tool for

supporting our ever-increasing at-risk student populations, and are eager to share our

ideas with other institutions facing the same challenges.

Today's Net Generation Students: Why They are Different, and Teaching Strategies

that Work for Them

Robert Feldman

Dean of the College of Social and Behavioral Sciences and Professor of Psychology

University of Massachusetts, Amherst

413.577.1203

[email protected]

Are today’s students different in some fundamental ways from prior generations of

students? Do their extensive experiences with technology, texting, Twittering, and

multi-tasking make them perceive the world, and even think about it, in ways that are

dissimilar from traditional students? In this hands-on presentation, based on a

growing body of research, we will address the issue of who Net Generation students

are, and how that impacts the nature of First Year Experience courses and student

success more generally. We’ll first examine the key characteristics of Net Generation

38

students, considering their independence, emotional and intellectual openness, and

their readiness to innovate. We’ll review research showing that they have thinking

styles that may differ from students in earlier generations and why multitasking is the

norm. We also will look at how they use technology and their preference for courses

that include technology. We then will examine general principles for teaching Net

Generation students, based on research findings that show the importance of

education being learner-centered. We will discuss the drawbacks to traditional

lectures in educating Net Generation students and how Net Generation students prefer

to discover information on their own rather than passively absorbing teacher-

generated content. We also will discuss the importance of student collaboration, and

that ultimately the education of Net Generation students revolves around not what

students know, but what students can learn. Finally, we will examine how, specifically,

to deal with the needs of Net Generation students in First Year Experience courses

through the use of technology. We will consider a number of technologies from the

perspective of novice instructors, reviewing ―smart‖ presentation media and the use of

interactive technologies such as blogs, wikis, and podcasts. We will consider the

overall benefits and disadvantages of the use of technology, addressing the practical—

and philosophical—issues of how its use is changing the nature of education. We’ll

close the session with a discussion of how we encourage success in Net Generation

students.

Satisfactory Academic Progress: A Collaborative and Innovative Approach to Achieving

Students Success and Retention

Aimi Moss

Director, Academic Advising and Career Center; New Student Programs

University of Michigan-Flint

(810) 762-3085

[email protected]

Satisfactory Academic Progress parts 668.16(e), 668.32(f) and 668.34 final rule

changes take effect on 7/1/2011 (United States Department of Education). In order to

standardize how all institutions are holding students accountable, a few key items are

changing: (1) Defines SAP terms of Probation and Warning; (2) Allows for one

semester of automatic warning and continued eligibility if the school assesses SAP

every payment period; and (3) Qualitative (GPA standard) and Quantitative (federal

minimum overall completion rate of 67%) criteria continue to be required. Schools are

not required to accept appeals, but if they do, they must specify the appeal

requirements and processes. An appeal may be approved only if the school: (1) Has

determined that the student will be able to meet SAP standards after the subsequent

payment period; or (2) Develops an academic plan with the student that, if followed,

will ensure the student is able to meet SAP standards by a specific point in time. This

will keep students on track to graduation and hold them accountable for their course

schedule each semester until such time they reach the minimum standards required.

Seventy percent (70%) of students attending the University of Michigan-Flint receive

some form of financial aid. At any given time, approximately 10% of the student

population is on academic probation or at risk of being placed on probation. This

combination of factors, coupled with changes to SAP prompted Student Affairs to

explore how we might proactively support students at risk. At UM-Flint, retention

efforts are synthesized along a continuum, with the end goal being systematic student

outreach and institutional engagement. This outreach, along with early warning

efforts, is achieved via student success/retention programs such as Early Academic

39

Assessment and the Academic Advantage Plan. The SAP initiative, a collaboration

between Academic Advising, Financial Aid, and Registration is aimed at keeping

students on track academically and in compliance where SAP is concerned. A member

of our Registration team, chosen because of his knowledge of academic and university

policies and exceptional customer service skills, was transferred to Financial Aid in

June 2011. His duties include: (1) developing the process by which the university will

proactively work with students in violation of SAP; (2) designing worksheets to

achieve standardization of academic plans across units campus-wide; (3) engaging

academic advisors in creating academic plans to set students on the path to

retaining/regaining aid eligibility; and (4) serving as liaison between Financial Aid and

academic advisors to monitor plans as set forth and agreed upon by student, academic

advisor, and Financial Aid. The team leading this session will discuss the vision that

brought about this initiative, share preliminary results, and review the benefits and

pitfalls of a collaboration of this magnitude.

Mary Jo Sekelsky

Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs

University of Michigan-Flint

(810) 762-3434

[email protected]

Transition Experiences of Middle Eastern Graduates in U.S. Universities

Fulya Marsh

Assistant Instructor

University of Missouri

573-355-6641

[email protected]

This presentation will start out by defining what Transition is by using Schlossberg et

al.'s (1995) 4 S Transition Theory. Next I will present two other models: (a) Taylor’s

Learning to Become Inter-culturally Competent Model (1994) and Furnham and (b)

Bochner’s Social Skills and Culture Learning Model (1986) and discuss elements that

were applicable to my study. I sought to provide a portrait of the lived experiences of

Middle Eastern graduate students transitioning into a Mid-western town in the U.S. to

pursue their graduate studies. I identified themes within the two stages of transition:

moving through and moving in (Schlossberg, 1995). During the ―moving through‖

stage, I found that Middle Eastern graduate students were coming from a culture that

was very family oriented, where respect, abidance, and honor were key elements.

They had to listen to the head of the family i.e. their father and do what he wanted

them to do. Although participants came from various Middle Eastern countries, they all

discussed one common point: the importance people back home placed on getting a

higher education from a foreign country, preferably the U.S. This they saw as the key

to getting a good job and having a good future. Generally, their fathers encouraged

them to pursue higher education in the U.S. They were determined to meet their

father’s expectations and make their family proud. Even though they were older than

the typical college aged student, these graduate students had been living with their

families all their lives. They had not experienced having to take on a lot of

responsibility, individuality, or independence. They came from a very strict, controlled,

and formal educational system; their social life was active and revolved around their

family and friends from school; they had limited previous job experiences. When

Middle Eastern graduate students transitioned from their secure, family dependent,


40

supportive environment and ―moved in‖ to their new environment in the U.S., I found

that the academic and social environment they were in, made them feel very welcome

and relaxed initially. During their first couple of weeks in their new environment, there

were various people who they could turn to for support: cohort members, professors,

staff members, extended family who were living in the U.S. and people from their own

country. However, as they no longer had their family’s support and guidance, I found

that graduate students coped with ambiguity with the support of people from their

own county whom they could turn to for advice and guidance when they needed to.

They were able to become more self-reliant and accept responsibilities so that they

could adapt to their new environments quicker. Although they experienced various

social challenges like getting used to the food, the weather, and issues related to

religion, none of the participants reported being discriminated against by anyone in

the academic or social environment. Similar to Bachner and Furnham (1986) and

Taylor (1994), I found that they initially experienced culture shock mainly stemming

from misunderstanding or being unaware of the cultural issues. They overcame such

challenges by applying Taylor’s (1994) behavioral learning strategies. When they

initially met their professors for the first time they also experienced academic

challenges like feeling intimidated and scared as they had such high regards towards

all of them. They were very respectful and found it hard not to use titles like Dr. when

addressing their professors. As for academic studies, all of the participants found

getting used to the university system extremely challenging. They needed guidance

and support especially if they were mid-year enrollees who had missed the orientation

session.

Building a Success Center from the Ground Up

Felecia Edwards

Director, First-Year Success Center

University of New Haven

203-932-7312

[email protected]

This presentation will bring together the strategies implemented by the First-Year

Success Center at the University of New Haven that will be helpful in building a similar

department at other institutions. We will discuss how we established our funding,

staffed our area, and created an annual cycle. Through the use of multiple student

retention data systems, such as MapWorks and CSI, we will share what information we

used to predict which students would need the most support. We will present how we

use student feedback and student-centered customer service to bring students the

services that they find valuable. We will focus on the collaborative effort that we have

established with other offices in order to gain support, create a brand, and provide

students with a network of support in their first year of college. The relationships we

have built with other campus offices, faculty, staff members, and students have helped

us support first-year students holistically. For example, by teaming up with the advisor

for undeclared students, as well as the career development center, we have built a

support network for undecided students at the university. By conducting research

before we opened the success center, we were able to discover what tools would be

most useful in working with incoming students. We will highlight the services we have

provided to students, including: success coaching, mentoring, a call center,

programming, monitoring, and proactive outreach. There will be a discussion of the

use of our website, Facebook, and twitter to reach students. We will also talk about our

use of intrusive and appreciative advising in our outreach and one-on-one meetings

41

with students. We will conclude our session by offering advice from what we have

learned in our first year at the university. We will share best practices for getting

started, and ideas for the best ways to report outcomes and display your

accomplishments to both internal and external constituent groups.

Aschlee Cole

Student Success Coach


203-479-4581

[email protected]

Tiffany Green

Student Success Coach


203-479-4245

[email protected]

Examining the Effects of Academic and Social Intervention Courses on Engagement

among Community College Students

Micaela Mercado

Ph.D. Candidate

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

954-600-6807

[email protected]

Multivariate analyses using propensity scores weighting was applied to examine the

treatment effect of each intervention on student engagement outcomes. Results

indicate that learning communities have the highest treatment effect on active-

collaborative learning and student-faculty interactions than any other intervention

examined in this study. Developmental mathematic courses had the lowest effect on

student engagement outcomes.

Exploring the Efficacy of Early Intervention Based on Psychosocial Risk Factors

Dale Tampke

Dean, Undergraduate Studies University of North Texas

940.565.4321

[email protected]

Introduction Six-year graduation rates average 57% at four-year institutions (Horn &

Nevill, 2006), suggesting many students are ill-prepared to meet challenges they face

upon entry into college. Starting in the 1970¡¦s, research has shown that psychosocial

factors are useful in predicting postsecondary student outcomes such as academic

performance (as measured by GPA) and persistence (as measured by

reenrollment/retention). Recently, Robbins et al. (2004) summarized this literature in

a meta-analysis containing 109 studies. Results showed that psychosocial factors

facilitating performance and persistence can be grouped into three domains:

motivation, social engagement, and self-regulation. ENGAGE (formerly the

Student Readiness Inventory) was developed based on the aforementioned literature.

42

It is a low-stakes, self-report instrument containing 108 items measuring

characteristics amenable to change through intervention. It consists of 10 scales

falling into the three domains identified in the Robbins et al. (2004) meta-analysis.

ENGAGE has shown excellent reliability. demonstrated incremental validity in

predicting GPA and retention over and above other factors, and has been shown to

increase educators¡¦ ability to detect risk by as much as 50%. Risk Assessment and

Intervention Model The assessment and intervention model used a method of

identifying at-risk students and intervening with an ¡§immediate individualized

approach¡¨ (Levitz et al., 1999). First, students completed ENGAGE in groups during

orientation sessions (N = 3,175). Next, at-risk students were selected based on

ENGAGE results and other available data. Students were invited to meet with advisors

to discuss results. Of the 422 students identified as at-risk, 160 (38%) attended the

meeting and comprised the treatment group; the remainder were considered a

comparison group. Advisors met with at-risk students early in the fall semester,

discussed ENGAGE results, and asked students to develop one ¡§strength¡¨ and work

on one ¡§need¡¨. Advisors highlighted campus resources designed to help students

develop skills using a crosswalk that mapped resources to ENGAGE results. Outcomes

Three outcomes were used to assess intervention effectiveness and student success:

GPA, percentage in good academic standing (i.e., GPA > 2.0), and retention rates.

Results for the treatment and comparison groups were: Outcome Treatment

Comparison GPA (1st year) 2.24 2.14 Good academic standing 74% 63% Retention

(1st to 2nd year) 76% 70% Results show that at-risk students who participated in the

intervention experienced higher rates of academic success and were more likely to

remain enrolled at the institution.

Alex Casillas

Senior Research Associate

ACT, Inc.

319-337-1211

[email protected]

College – It’s Not All Fun and Games

Kimberly Osada

Director - START Office

University of North Texas

940-565-4403

[email protected]

During this session, the presenters will discuss ways of increasing student

engagement with the material taught in a First Year Seminar and introduce

participants to the game they developed for this purpose – UNT Road to Success (RTS).

RTS is used throughout the semester-long course to introduce and reinforce concepts

and information taught during the seminar. In the game, each player starts as a new

freshman and moves through the trials and tribulations of all four years of college. The

winner is the player who successfully navigates the college experiences and

―graduates.‖ There are final exams at the end of each year of college where a trivia

question about the university must be answered before the student is able to move on

to the next year of college. There are ―Get a Life‖ cards and ―Get an Education‖ cards

that are used to represent things that happen while in college and in the ―real world‖

in general. Students are taught progressively more difficult lessons each year. Their

freshman year, they are accepted to the university; meet their roommate, buy

43

textbooks, go to Orientation, and gain the ―Freshman 15.‖ By their sophomore year,

they rent an apartment, get a dog, and make a car payment. By their junior year, they

go to the Career Center, Student Money Management Center, and go on Spring Break.

Their senior year, they buy a suit for an interview, get an internship, buy graduation

items, and finally graduate. We believe by using team building skills in the classroom

and giving the student resources on campus, they will know where to get the help they

need to be successful and stay in college. As with the many students that drop-out of

college today, in our game, if a player runs out of money, they must sit out five turns

while they are ―working a job‖ to pay their college expenses. The player is then

allotted $1,000 and can go back to the beginning of the year where they were forced

to drop out. At the end of the game, the first to graduate picks a card with a career

that requires a bachelor’s degree. The remaining players pick a card with a career that

does NOT require a bachelor’s degree. The students must then research their career

and bring back to the next class period the salary for their career, job duties, and

working conditions and give a 1-2 minute presentation on their research. Discussion

will then be held on the pros of getting a college education. The session will be divided

into three parts: introduction, game play, and discussion. Participants will become

actively engaged by playing and discussing the game and its implications.

Tammy Lowrie

Assistant Director - START Office

University of North Texas

940-565-4403

[email protected]

Emerging Evidence from the 2011 National Survey of Senior Capstone Experiences

Ryan Padgett

Assistant Director of Research, Grants, and Assessment

University of South Carolina

803-777-2134

[email protected]

Senior capstone experiences are identified within the literature as opportunities for

the integration, synthesis, and application of learning (see Henscheid, 2000; Leskes &

Miller, 2006; Kuh, 2008). Senior capstone experiences empirically have a strong,

positive relationship with deep or integrative learning (Kuh, 2008), and are also

suggested as having positive relationships with self-reported cognitive outcomes, such

as critical thinking, intellectual inquiry, and independence within learning (see

Brownwell & Swaner, 2010; NSSE 2009). Guided by this research and the strong

connection these culminating experiences have on the connection between learning

and real-world application, senior capstone experiences are characterized as a high-

impact practice (see Kuh, 2008). The presentation will provide an overview of the

survey methodology, including data collection, description of the institutional data

sample, measures within the survey, and the analytical method. The survey

administration has not concluded, so no preliminary findings are currently available.

However, given the duration between the end of the survey administration and the SIT

conference, the data will be cleaned and coded in time for presentation. A discussion

of the results will highlight national trends and provide attendees with practical

evidence and recommendations for evaluating, implementing, and/or assessing senior

capstone courses or projects on their campuses. The presentation will conclude with a

question and answer session with attendees. In addition, attendees will be encouraged

44

to share elements within their senior capstone experience they found to be innovative

or successful on their campus. Brownell, J. E., & Swaner, L. E. (2010). Five high-impact

practices: Research on learning outcomes, completion, and quality. Washington, DC:

Association of American Colleges and Universities. Henscheid, J. M. (2000). Professing

the disciplines: An analysis of senior seminars and capstone courses (Monograph No.

30). Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina, National Resource Center for The

First-Year Experience and Students in Transition. Kuh, G. D. (2008). High-impact

educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter.

Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities. Leskes, A., &

Miller, R. (2006). Purposeful pathways: Helping students achieve key learning

outcomes. National Survey of Student Engagement. (2009). Assessment for

improvement: Tracking student engagement over time. Bloomington, IN: Indiana

University Center for Postsecondary Research.

Cindy Kilgo

Graduate Assistant for Research, Grants, and Assessment


803-777-2247

[email protected]

Spirituality, Authenticity, Wholeness, and Self-Renewal in the Academy

Mary Stuart Hunter



803.777.4761

[email protected]

This session is designed to facilitate discussion among attendees. It will open with the

presenters providing context and background on important topic described in the title

of the session. Then in a small group, participants will be invited to discuss the

following questions: 1) In your institutional life and work, can you think of specific

times or situations in which you have experienced a clash between your personal

values and institutional values and practices? Give specific examples of times or

occasions in which you felt compelled to compromise your values and beliefs. 2) What

kind of collegial behavior or administrative policies generate value conflicts for you or

create inauthentic behavior? 3) In what ways are the beliefs and values of your

department or institution congruent or incongruent with your own? 4) Are there times

when your interactions with students have offered opportunities to discuss issues of

spirituality, authenticity, and wholeness? How have you reacted to the opportunity? 5)

Does your institution provide safe structures or opportunities for the sharing of

values? Would the process used for this session facilitate such sharing on your home

campus? The session will conclude with the presenters facilitating a processing of the

discussion and a sharing of resources on the topic.

John Gardner

Senior Fellow and Professor Emeritius


828.449.8044

[email protected]

Betsy Barefoot


45

Fellow


828.449.8044

[email protected]

Creating and Developing Learner-Centered CLassrooms

Mary Stuart Hunter



803.777.4761

[email protected]

This session will begin with an overview of key applicable tenets in the Barr and Tagg

article and an overview of the Weimer model for learner-centered classrooms.

Additional context will be provided based on David Kolb's experiential learning theory

and a model for designing engaging assignments created at the University of South

Carolina. Attendees will then be challenged to share ideas for making traditional

content in first-year seminars "more learner-centered". As a result of attending this

session, participants will: Be able to describe the differences between an instruction-

centered and a learning-centered institution. Be able to describe the differences

between a teacher-centered classroom and learner-centered classroom. Formulate

new learner-centered ideas for classroom strategies.

Writing on Campus-Based Initiatives: Strategies for Sharing Your Good Work With

Internal and External Audiences

Tracy Skipper

Assistant Director for Publications

University of South Carolina, National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience &

Students in Transition

(803) 777-6226

[email protected]

Increasingly, educators are asked to assess their work with students in transition to

demonstrate its efficacy. Yet, assessment data are of little value if they are not shared.

Professionals may be reluctant to engage in the act of writing about their work

because they believe it is too hard or too time-consuming. This session provides

strategies and a framework for developing brief scholarly practice pieces that describe

successful college transition initiatives. The development of an article for publication

in E-Source for College Transitions will serve as the framework for this session.

However, the strategies discussed and the writing practices explored are suitable for a

wide range of internal and external publication formats and can also be applied to

longer pieces (e.g., journal articles, book chapters). The session will open with a

general discussion of the possible range of venues for publishing the outcomes of

campus-based initiatives and describe the characteristics of a strong E-Source article.

The facilitator will also highlight some general recommendations for writing well,

exploring issues related to the message, the audience, the author, and the larger

context. The bulk of the session will engage participants in writing about a topic of

their choosing, but preferably a description of an effective campus practice, which they

would like to share with internal and/or external constituents. Participants will also


46

have an opportunity to receive feedback on their early ideas and drafts. Participants

are encouraged to bring a laptop, netbook, or tablet to capture their drafts. NOTE: To

facilitate the presentation of information and to allow for adequate time for writing

and peer review, we are requesting an extended session of 90 minutes. Because we

will be asking participants to write, we would like the room set with round tables

and/or classroom style.

Do Women Make the Difference? The relationship between high-impact program

participation and retention and time-to-graduation

Mark St. Andre

Assistant Dean of Undergraduate Studies

University of Utah

801-585-9876

[email protected]

The purpose of the present study is to investigate the hypothesis that University of

Utah students from 1999-2009 who participate in ―high impact‖ programs, designed to

engage students and help them appreciate all of the choices available to them at the

University, would be more likely to return for their second year and to graduate in a

shorter amount of time. To test this hypothesis, raw demographic and academic data

from the University of Utah’s Office of Budget and Institutional Analysis (OBIA) and

enrollment information from the programs under study, were merged into a data set. A

previous analysis of Utah’s LEAP (first-year experience) program and its impact on

retention and time-to-graduation (presented at the International First-Year Experience

Conference in Dublin in 2008) utilized a matching methodology for examining

differences between LEAP and non-LEAP students. This approach was interesting

because it literally created almost 1500 matched pairs of students who were identical

in terms of gender, ethnicity, age, admissions index and high school attended. As such,

it allowed the investigators to literally (as opposed to just statistically) control for the

impact of these variables on the outcomes. However, it was limited in its

representativeness, as most matched pairs came from a handful of large Utah high

schools. The current study is then, in part, a replication of that previous study of LEAP,

but also expands to examine all of the UGS programs and their impact on retention and

time-to-graduation. The previous LEAP matching study found that LEAP students

outperformed their non-LEAP ―twins‖ on early GPA’s, retention, and four and six-year

graduation rates. Interestingly, the LEAP women were responsible for the overall

differences between LEAP and non-LEAP students. The LEAP women were higher than

their non-LEAP counterparts in every one of the outcomes mentioned above, while the

LEAP men did not outperform the non-LEAP males in any way. The current study

proposes to examine similar questions, but will utilize statistical controls via

regression for the analyses. In addition to replicating the analysis of the LEAP

program, it will also examine similar relationships between other high-impact

programs and retention and/or time-to-graduation. In part, there is a desire to see if

the ―female effect‖ can be replicated with a more representative sample, and also

whether this effect appears in other programs at the University. This analysis has not

been conducted yet, as the data pieces are just now finally being assembled.

How Explicit Focus on Identity Affects Students’ Transition to College

Michelle Bass


47

Graduate Student/Project Assistant

University of Wisconsin-Madison

410-294-7825

[email protected]

The presentation will begin with a discussion of why it is important to study identity

development of late adolescents, with a focus on underrepresented college student

populations, and their early transitional college experiences. I will then describe the

specific designed learning environment in which I studied the transition to college, a

First Year Interest Group (FIG) course Representing Self Through Media, structured to

foster identity development through a media based representation of self. I will

discuss how FIGs have tried to create more inclusive environments for learning and

social growth among transitioning students from underrepresented student

populations. Using Côté and Levine’s (1988, 2002) framework of a viable social

identity as a model for understanding identity, I will discuss six case study students in

the course. A description of the course’s explicit design and curriculum focus on issues

of identity and representation and why it serves as a valuable research site to study

late adolescent identity development in action will be included. Having a model for

understanding identity is only the first piece of trying to untangle the development of

adolescent identity. I will explain my reasons for using the stories people tell as the

main way of understanding their identity mainly through a discussion of narrative

analysis (Dauite & Lightfoot, 2004; Freeman, 1997) and why it serves as the main

analytical tool for understanding the identity development of students during their

transition to college Through the stories of my case study participants, which include

first generation college students and bi-racial youth, we will see the importance of

community and friendships created in the FIG course, determining which aspects of

individual identity to share in a digital media representation of self, and discussions

about identity in the classroom and interactions with the researcher and peers in the

transition to college. The practice and creation of a representational identity piece was

accomplished through production of a radio show in the style of This American Life. I

will also share some of these pieces and include a discussion of my multimodal

methodology (Halverson, 2010; Halverson, Bass, & Woods, in process) for analyzing

these digital media products. The presentation will conclude with addressing how my

relationships with the participants in the study affected the study and the way I talk

about it as well as the importance of being viewed as a member of their first year of

college community.

“You Don’t Have to Go Home, But You Can’t Stay Here”: Career Advising and the

Sophomore Year

Matthew DeVoll

Assistant Dean, College of Arts & Sciences

Washington University in St. Louis

314-935-5392

[email protected]

As universities prepare current students for the transition into the working world,

sophomore advising plays a critical role (―Promoting Career Success‖). Students at

this stage are making important decisions that can ultimately affect their transition

out of the university, such as what major to declare, what general education courses

to select, and what to do with the summer. Career intervention at this point is wise,

48

but with so many other important decisions traditionally related to the sophomore

year at hand, it can create considerable stress on the students. This Roundtable

Discussion asks, then, what are the best practices for career advising during the

sophomore year? More specifically, it asks, how are these practices informed by such

things as developmental and career theory as well as other important decisions during

the sophomore year related to academic and personal development? Also, since

informed advisors increasingly see academic, personal, and career development as a

unified experience (Handbook of Career Advising), how might a university best

coordinate efforts among staff who traditionally work in separate spheres, such as

career advisors, academic advisors, and residential assistants? The leaders of the

Roundtable Discussion would open the discussion with a brief overview of the

problem, informed by background reading from a variety of sources on career advising

and the sophomore year, along with their experiences as Dean for the Arts & Sciences

Sophomore Class, Career Center Team Leader and point-person in Career Center for

sophomore year, and Associate Director of Residential Life. Currently we are working

together to develop new approaches to career advising during the sophomore year,

and we would welcome the opportunity to discuss the issues with colleagues from

other colleges and universities. Works Cited Gore, Paul A. and Mary Stuart Hunter,

―Promoting Career Success in the Second Year of College‖ in Helping Sophomores

Succeed. Eds. Mary Stuart Hunter, Barbara F. Tobolowsky, and John N. Gardner. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 2010. 99-113. Hughey, Kenneth F., et al. Handbook of Career

Advising. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 2009

Carol Moakley

Team Leader-Career Development


314-935-4985

[email protected]

Mary Elliott

Associate Director Residential Life


314-935-8294

[email protected]

Increased Cost Effectiveness through an Innovative Delivery Model for First-Year

Seminars

William L. Vanderburgh

Executive Director, Office for Faculty Development and Student Success

Wichita State University

316-978-3379

[email protected]

Wichita State University is a mid-size, mid-rank, urban-serving state university in the

Midwestern U.S. that is essentially an open access, commuter campus. Adopting the

traditional first-year seminar in this type of institution presents a challenge, so WSU

101 is using a unique delivery model. WSU 101 is a full semester, graded, three-credit

course. The course has several mutually-supporting components: Each student spends

an hour per week in a class of 25 students, an hour per week in a ―supersection‖ of

about 200 students, and the remaining third of the course is delivered online. Whereas

typically students think of the large class as the ―real‖ course while the


49

recitation/tutorial section is a supplement, we use the terms ―section‖ and

―supersection‖ and structure activities to make clear that the small section is the

student’s home base. A peer leader co-facilitates the section with an instructor,

attends the supersection, and also meets one-on-one with each student every month

(or more often as needed/requested). The instructor serves as first contact if an early

alert flag is raised on a student in his/her section. This delivery model allows students

to experience several key learning environments they will encounter during their

college careers: small and large classes, online, small group and individual work, and

one-on-one with peers, advisors and instructors. Structuring the delivery of the course

in this way conserves university resources while maintaining conditions that promote

the desired student learning outcomes. This innovative delivery model requires only a

3-5-hour per week time commitment on the part of the classroom instructor. A course

coordinator supervises the peer leaders, leads the supersection, and maintains the

online portion of the course. While some of the efficiency of the model comes from

having a common syllabus, written materials and online component, the model is

flexible enough to be adapted to the needs of different constituencies. For example,

college-specific versions of WSU 101 were created for the colleges of Engineering,

Health Professions, and Education. Up to one-third of the material in the college-

specific versions of the course is different from the standard version taught in the

College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. Our conference session will outline the cost

savings derived from this unique delivery model, as well as the steps taken to

encourage campus-wide involvement. In addition, practical experiences will be shared

about how the implementation and assessment of this delivery model are

progressing.

Susannah Brown

Student Success Specialist

Wichita State University

316-978-3209

[email protected]


18th National Conference on Students in Transition … · Results are presented using the 4-S...

Documents

Transcript of 18th National Conference on Students in Transition … · Results are presented using the 4-S...