1 / 37

Learning Communities

Learning Communities. A review of the National Research & evidence from Cañada College. Gregory M Stoup Office of Planning, Research & Student Success Cañada College. Brief background on Learning Communities . Have a long history first initiatives in 1960s

kawena
Download Presentation

Learning Communities

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Learning Communities A review of the National Research & evidence from Cañada College Gregory M Stoup Office of Planning, Research & Student Success Cañada College

  2. Brief background on Learning Communities • Have a long history • first initiatives in 1960s • Community College movement in 1980s Little rigorous research on the effectiveness of learning communities on academic outcomes • A body of research is emerging on the impacts of learning communities on students at the developmental level • The Effects of Learning Communities for Students in Developmental Education (MDRC, July 2012) • Learning Better Together: The Impact of Learning Communities on Persistence of Low Income Students (Cathy Engstrom & Vincent Tinto, 2008)

  3. MDRC Study First large-scale randomized study Longitudinal study of 174 Learning communities offered at 6 community colleges* involving 6,974 students Nearly all learning communities in the study included a course in developmental English or developmental math Typical model studied involved linking the developmental course with either a college level course, another developmental course and/or a student success course Colleges in MDRC Study: the Community College of Baltimore County, in Maryland; Hillsborough Community College, in Tampa, Fla.; Houston Community College; Kingsborough Community College, in Brooklyn, N.Y.; Merced College, in California, and Queensborough Community College, in Queens, N.Y. Kingsborough and Queensborough are part of the City University of New York

  4. Components of the Learning Community Model Degree of Implementation Components Basic Midrange Advanced Students are a mix of LC students and students taking the course as a stand alone Most (but not all) students in the linked courses are in the LC All students are in the LC; Courses are selected to promote integration 1. Linked courses and student cohorts Teacher teams plan before, during & after the semester; Curriculum tightly integrated Teacher teams rarely communicate about curriculum or students Teacher teams communicate periodically throughout the semester 2. Faculty collaboration Syllabi are fully aligned; joint projects, joint grading rubrics; joint assessment Teachers assign at least one joint project during the semester 3. Instructional Practices Courses taught as if they were stand alone Additional support offered but not integrated into the classroom Extra support fully integrated into classroom & often required for students No additional student support is offered 4. Student Support Source: Effects of Learning Communities for Students in Developmental Education, page 5.

  5. Findings from the MDRC Study The overall conclusion from the MDRC report is that learning communities as typically operated in community colleges, on average, should not be expected to produce more than a very modest impact on credits earned (+0.5 on average) and that this intervention, by itself, will not likely lead to higher rates of reenrollment and completion for academically underprepared students. 00 However, the evidence also suggests that a learning community program with substantially enhanced supports for students, such as ongoing or extra advising and tightly integrated curriculum across all courses in the LC, may lead to greater benefits than the average learning community program*. * This finding is generally consistent with those reported in Basic Skills as a Foundation for Student Success in California Community Colleges (The Poppy Copy).

  6. A review of evidence on Cañada College Learning Communities Special thanks to Bart Scott for outstanding data collection and quality control

  7. A Profile of Cañada College Learning Communities Some background information • LC activity & performance difficult to track systematically • First LC offered in Fall 2004 (Freshman Success) • Slightly better record keeping since Fall 2008 • Small sample sizes hamper more thorough analysis

  8. Overview of Learning Communities (Fall 2008 – Spring 2012) • Over this period we offered 44 courses from 14 different departments • In 2011/12 we offered 18 courses from 8 departments • Growth in LC course offerings has outpaced overall college offerings • Significant variety of LC approaches; this is not an homogenous group

  9. Percent Growth in Student Headcount Since 2008/09 Learning Community Cañada College Percent Change from 2008/09 Level Base Year Headcount 386 465 690 545 LC 10,753 11,595 11,044 10,840 College

  10. Percent Growth in Number of Sections Offered Since 2008/09 Learning Community Cañada College Percent Change from 2008/09 Level Base Year Section Count 39 46 75 61 LC 1,475 1,471 1,314 1,401 College

  11. Learning Community offerings over last four years Student Headcount

  12. Learning Community offerings over last four years Student Headcount

  13. Learning Community offerings over last four years Student Headcount

  14. Student Populations (Fall 2008 – Spring 2012) Learning Community Cañada College N = 1,874 N = 28,453 Not Reported Female Male

  15. Student Populations (Fall 2008 – Spring 2012) Learning Community Cañada College 32% 26% 22% 22% 16% 14% N = 1,874 N = 28,453 20-24 Yrs Old Less than 18 Yrs Old 18 & 19 Yrs Old 40+ Yrs Old 25-29 Yrs Old 30-39 Yrs Old

  16. Student Populations (Fall 2008 – Spring 2012) Cañada College Learning Community 71% 40% 36% 10% 12% N = 28,453 N = 1,874 Black Non-Hispanic Filipino Native American Asian Multi Race Hispanic Pacific Islander White Non-Hispanic

  17. Course Performance (Fall 2008 – Spring 2012) Cañada College Overall* Learning Community N = 1,874 N = 28,453 One benchmark for evaluating overall performance is the college average. However, this is a crude benchmark and doesn't properly account for the unique course taking patterns of students in Learning Communities * Does not include PE courses or students taking a single course during a term.

  18. Course Performance (Fall 2008 – Spring 2012) Control Group* Learning Community N = 1,872 N = 10,993 A more appropriate benchmark might be to look at students taking the same courses during the same terms as those in the Learning Community but offered outside the Learning Community format.

  19. But ideally a benchmark should also account for some of the student characteristics associated with enrollment in Learning Communities We isolate three characteristics and control for their effects Ethnicity Age Unit Load

  20. Summary of findings from analysis of these three factors Learning Communities are associated with slightly higher success in terms of the % of “A” Grades awarded for: • Hispanic students • Students 18 or 19 Yrs Old • Student taking less than 12 units But, are also associated with lower levels of success ( in this case, higher withdraw rates) for: • African-American students • Students 20 - 24 Yrs Old

  21. Course Performance (Fall 2008 – Spring 2012) Control Group** Learning Community N = 1,872 So given that our Learning Communities attract different distributions of students in terms of ethnicity, age & unit load and seeing that those groups succeed at different rates, we ask: what performance would we expect in a control group that had the same ethnicity, age and unit load distribution as our Learning Communities? Expected Performance controlling for ethnicity, age and unit load

  22. So much variation

  23. Course pass rates for 16 individual Learning Communities offered in 2010/11 * Control Group is unique for each course. It’s composed of the same course offered the same term but not using the learning community format.

  24. Persistence rates for 16 individual Learning Communities offered in 2010/11 * Control Group is unique for each course. It’s composed of the same course offered the same term but not using the learning community format.

  25. A simple model. Why so much variation? Learning Community Sequence Completion Basic Skills Student

  26. Learning communities have many moving parts that interact in dynamic ways and vary from setting to setting. Learning Community Sequence of course material Learning Community Synthesis of course content Work group oversight Sequence Completion Basic Skills Student Counseling support Linkages to library Coordination between faculty & counselors Timeliness of feedback on progress Classroom technology Examples in lesson plan Protocols for making group assignments Illustrative purposes only (not actual properties of the learning communities researched in this study )

  27. Case Analysis: Basic Skills English 826 & Reading 826

  28. Effects of Learning Communities on Sequence Completion Rates in Basic Skills Linked Courses in Learning Community ------- Traditional Stand-Alone Courses ------ ENGL 826 ENGL 836 ENGL 100 READ 826 READ 836 CRER 401 Fall 2010 Cohort Learning Community Of those in the starting cohort those that Enroll & Pass ENGL 836 & READ 836 Of those in the starting cohort those that Enroll & Pass ENGL 100 No. of Students LC = 60 38% 23 57% 34 Control Group* No. of Students 33% 13 Control = 40 53% 21 *Control Group consists of students enrolling in both Engl 826 & Reading 826 courses offered outside the Learning Community format (Fall 2010)

  29. Effects of Learning Communities on Grade Performance in Basic Skills Courses New Aggregate Performance Metric Course GPA We pool all the final grades received by all students in that classroomand calculate a GPA for the course. Unlike success rates, course GPA allows us to incorporate the effect of the number of A & B grades received by students. Example ENGL 100 Section A ENGL 100 Section B Class size = 45 students Class size = 54 students No. of A Grades Received = 4No. of A Grades Received = 28 No. of B Grades Received = 14No. of B Grades Received = 10 No. of CGrades Received = 18No. of C Grades Received = 5 No. of DGrades Received = 7No. of D Grades Received = 8 No. of FGrades Received = 2No. of F Grades Received = 3 Success Rate = 80%Success Rate = 80% Course GPA = 2.24Course GPA = 2.97

  30. Effects of Learning Communities on Grade Performance in Basic Skills Courses Linked Courses in Learning Community ------- Traditional Stand-Alone Courses ------ ENGL 826 ENGL 836 ENGL 100 READ 826 READ 836 CRER 401 Fall 2010 Cohort Learning Community ENGL = 2.60 ENGL = 2.04 2.76 READ = 2.98 READ = 2.15 Control Group* ENGL = 2.41 ENGL = 2.78 2.82 READ = 1.31 READ = 2.24 Fall 2010 Cohort

  31. Salient Findings The college has been offering a growing number of learning communities over the last few years Learning Communities tend to attract a slightly larger number of Hispanic and younger students Learning communities are not an homogenous group; there is wide variety in both the models used and in student performance.

  32. Salient Findings There is some evidence that Learning Communities create an improved “Mastery” effect. Further research needed. Within the English & Reading Basic Skills domain there is some evidence that LCs are associated with slightly higher sequence completion rates. Students in Learning Communities have slightly higher performance rates during the semester they are offered, but experience a return to the mean once they leave the LC. Because of the wide degree of variation in performance across all Cañada’s Leaning Communities, generalizations about the relative success of Learning Communities is difficult to make.

  33. DISCUSSION

  34. ADDITIONAL SLIDES

  35. Course Performance by Ethnicity (Fall 2008 – Spring 2012) Control Group* Learning Community N = 1,872 N = 10,993 Better than Control Worse than Control 90% confidence level 90% confidence level

  36. Course Performance by Age Group (Fall 2008 – Spring 2012) Control Group* Learning Community N = 1,872 N = 10,993 Better than Control Worse than Control 90% confidence level 90% confidence level

  37. Course Performance by Unit Load (Fall Terms Only; 2008 – 2011) Control Group* Learning Community N = 1,289 N = 4,449 Better than Control Worse than Control 90% confidence level 90% confidence level

More Related