We’ll Change Your Life. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
We’ll Change Your Life. PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
We’ll Change Your Life.

play fullscreen
1 / 72
We’ll Change Your Life.
86 Views
Download Presentation
mead
Download Presentation

We’ll Change Your Life.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. STEM Learning Communities End of the Year Report 2012-2013 Sponsored by Title V Presented by: Oralia De los Reyes, Ph.D. Director of Title V Michele Hansen, Ph.D.External Evaluators from IUPUI We’ll Change Your Life.

  2. PRESENTATION OVERVIEW • Program Results by Grant Objectives • 1) Professional Development • 2) Learning Communities • 3) Integration of Technology • Assessment Instruments and Results • Intervention for Math Readiness • Conclusions and Implications

  3. Comprehensive Evaluation Plan Designed to Address The Following: • Has the centralized, comprehensive faculty development program encouraged faculty to integrate instructional course innovations for improved learning outcomes? (Objective 1) • In what ways have the structured, integrated learning communities (LCs) for STEM students and intrusive support interventions made distinguishable impacts on student learning and academic success outcomes? (Objective 2) • To what extent have faculty integrated the use of technology into course redesign and assessment of student learning outcomes to guide curricular improvements based on evidence? (Objective 3).

  4. Summative and Formative Evaluation: Student and Faculty Focus Groups Student Academic Achievement Retention and Graduation Rates Critical Thinking Assessment Test (CAT) National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) Course Embedded Assessment - Actual Student Work Blackboard Outcomes Systems- Course Level Assessment

  5. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

  6. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FY 2009-2013 Source: Professional Development Database, compiled by Title V, Fall 2012.

  7. Annual Faculty Survey The UTB Annual Faculty Survey was designed to assess: • Participation in professional development activities, • How faculty spend their time inside and outside the classroom, • Pedagogical strategies faculty are using to engage students, • Use of technology and assessment planning, • How faculty perceive institutional priorities.

  8. Annual Faculty Survey Results • The survey was administered in Spring 2013 to 409 faculty. • 153 responded and completed the survey. • The response rate was 37%.

  9. Faculty Respondents Academic Rank

  10. Faculty Professional Development Participation

  11. Faculty Satisfaction With Professional Development

  12. Using Assignments To Improve General Education Outcomes

  13. Learning Communities Faculty

  14. LC Faculty Offer More Engaging Learning Opportunities Response Scale 1 = Never, 2 = Some, 3 = Often, and 4 = Very Often

  15. LC Faculty Offer More Engaging Learning Opportunities Response Scale 1 = Never, 2 = Some, 3 = Often, and 4 = Very Often

  16. LC Faculty Offer More Engaging Learning Opportunities Response Scale 1 = Never, 2 = Some, 3 = Often, and 4 = Very Often

  17. LEARNING COMMUNITIES

  18. STUDENTS ENROLLED IN STEM LEARNING COMMUNITIES Data Source: Title V STEM Learning Communities Student Tracking Database, compiled by Title V, Fall 2013.

  19. LEARNING COMMUNITY STUDENTSMAJOR DISTRIBUTION, N=1541 Data Source: Datatel Database, Management and Reporting Office, compiled by Title V, Fall 2013.

  20. Learning Communities’ Fall to Fall Retention Rate by Cohort NOTE: UTB Retention is for Fall to Fall FTFT College Ready Freshmen students Data Source: Institutional Effectiveness Report Database and Learning Communities Student Tracking Database, compiled by Title V, Fall 2013.

  21. CONTROL AND COMPARISON GROUPS The CONTROL GROUP was drawn from institutional data and was defined by random selection of non LC students... with same classification taking same courses in the same semester The COMPARISON GROUP was drawn from Grade Distribution Reports for All Non-dual and Non-LC sections in Fall 2012 and Spring 2013, extracted from Office of Data Management and Reporting Informer Report, Fall 2013

  22. FALL 2012 - FALL 2013 LC STUDENTS’ DEMOGRAPHICS NOTE: Control Group was defined by Student Classification and Non LC students taking same courses during the same semester Data Source: Title V STEM Learning Communities Student Tracking Database, compiled by Title V, Fall 2013.

  23. OVERALL GRADE DISTRIBUTION: FALL 2012 - SPRING 2013, LC N=746; Control N =1192 Data Source : Title V STEM Learning Communities Data Team and Office of Data Management and Reporting Database, Fall 2013

  24. GRADE DISTRIBUTION: FALL 2012 - SPRING 2013, MATH 1314, N=187; Control N=187 Data Source:Office of Data Management and Reporting Database, compiled by Title V STEM Learning Communities Data Team, Fall 2013

  25. GRADE DISTRIBUTION: FALL 2012 - SPRING 2013, HISTORY 1301, N=153; Control N =154 Data Source:Office of Data Management and Reporting Database, compiled by Title V STEM Learning Communities Data Team, Fall 2013

  26. English 1301 Grade Distribution: FALL 2012 - SPRING 2013, UTB N= 1515; LC N=120 Note: Comparison Data Source:Office of Data Management and Reporting Database, compiled by Title V STEM Learning Communities Data Team, Fall 2013

  27. Math 2412 (Pre-Calculus) Grade Distribution:FALL 2012–SPRING 2013, UTB N=555; LC N=118 Data Source:Office of Data Management and Reporting Database, compiled by Title V STEM Learning Communities Data Team, Fall 2013

  28. Math 2413 (Calculus) Grade Distribution:Spring 2013, ControlN =16; LC N=22 Data Source:Office of Data Management and Reporting Database, compiled by Title V STEM Learning Communities Data Team, Fall 2013

  29. History 1301 Grade Distribution:Fall 2012-Spring 2013, UTB N=1660; LC=153 Data Source:Office of Data Management and Reporting Database, compiled by Title V STEM Learning Communities Data Team, Fall 2013

  30. BIOL 3312 Cell and Molecular Biology Grade Distribution:Spring 2013, LC N=43; Control N=66 Data Source:Office of Data Management and Reporting Database, compiled by Title V STEM Learning Communities Data Team, Fall 2013

  31. CHEM 2323 Organic Chemistry I Grade Distribution:Fall 2012, LC N=74; Control N=32 Data Source:Office of Data Management and Reporting Database, compiled by Title V STEM Learning Communities Data Team, Fall 2013

  32. WRITING ASSESSMENT FALL 2012, N= 152 Data Source:Blackboard Outcomes System, English Department, Compiled by Title V STEM Learning Communities, Jan 2013.

  33. WRITING ASSESSMENT SPRING 2013, N=92 Data Source:Blackboard Outcomes System, English Department, Compiled by Title V STEM Learning Communities, Sep 2013.

  34. SURVEY RESULTS

  35. The NSSE assesses the extent to which undergraduate students are involved in educational practices empirically linked to high levels of learning and development. Random sample of first-year students and seniors. Strength of NSSE is that it is aligned with many of the Title V learning objectives and allows for comparisons with internal peers (UTB students not enrolled in LCs), peer institutions, and the NSSE national sample. 2013 Sample 228 First-Year Students (17% response rate). 37 LC students and 191 Non LC. National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)

  36. Integrative Learning and Critical Thinking Response Scale Connected: 1 = Never, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Often, and 4 = Very Often Response Scale Applying: 1= Very Little, 2 = Some, 3 = Quite A Bit, 4 = Very Much

  37. Interactions and Connections with Other Students Response Scale: 1 = Never, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Often, and 4 = Very Often

  38. Interactions and Connections with Faculty Members Response Scale: 1 = Never, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Often, and 4 = Very Often

  39. Interactions and Connections with Faculty Members Response Scale: 1 = Never, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Often, and 4 = Very Often

  40. Engagement Indicator: Reflective and Integrative Learning Note: Engagement Indicators not weighted by gender, institution type, and enrollment size for UTB data file. LC and NOT LC UTB represent raw student scores. p<.10

  41. Engagement Indicator: Reflective and Integrative Learning • “Combined ideas from different courses when completing assignments” • “Connected your learning to societal problems or issues” • “Included diverse perspectives (political, religious, racial/ethnic, gender, etc.) in course discussions or assignments” • “Examined the strengths and weaknesses of your own views on a topic or issue” • "Tried to better understand someone else's views by imagining how an issue looks from his or her perspective" • “Learned something that changed the way you understand an issue or concept” • “Connected ideas from your courses to your prior experiences and knowledge”

  42. High Impact Practice Participation: Service Learning Note: detailed frequency data not available on NSSE provided report for UT System and NSSE sample.

  43. Learning Communities Student Survey • Designed to assess students’ satisfaction levels with their experiences in learning community courses. • Administered Fall 2010, Spring 2011, and Fall 2011, Spring 2012, Fall 2012, Spring 2013 (Washington College Version), and Fall 2013. • Responses on Likert-Type Scale where 1=Very Little, to 5=Very Much • Current Results Fall 2012 and Spring 2013 • N= 144 (Fall 2012 ), N=126

  44. LC SURVEY : Fall 2012 Overall Satisfaction Rates Responses on Likert-Type Scale where 1=Very Little, to 5=Very Much, the percentage represents the rate of satisfied and very much satisfied Data Source: Fall 2012 Title V STEM Learning Communities Student Survey, Title V STEM LC Data Team

  45. LC SURVEY : Spring 2013 Results SCALE: 1-5 From strongly disagree to strongly agree, the percentage represents the rate of agree and strongly agree. In my learning community, I: Instrument Source: LC survey from the Washington Center . Data Source. Title V LC Data Team. May 2013

  46. LC SURVEY : Spring 2013 Results SCALE: 1-5 From strongly disagree to strongly agree, the percentage represents the rate of agree and strongly agree. Teachers in my Learning Communities: Instrument Source: LC survey from the Washington Center . Data Source. Title V LC Data Team. May 2013

  47. LC SURVEY : Spring 2013 Results SCALE: 1-5 From strongly disagree to strongly agree, the percentage represents the rate of agree and strongly agree. My participation in this learning community helps me to develop my ability to: Instrument Source: LC survey from the Washington Center . Data Source. Title V LC Data Team. May 2013

  48. LC SURVEY : Spring 2013 Results SCALE: 1-5 From strongly disagree to strongly agree, the percentage represents the rate of agree and strongly agree. In my learning community, compared to other classes, I spend more, less, or about the same amount of time: Instrument Source: LC survey from the Washington Center . Data Source. Title V LC Data Team. May 2013

  49. Classroom Community Scale (CCS) (Rovai, 2002) • The 20-item Scale measures sense of community in a learning environment. • Research results have suggested that the Classroom Community Scale (CCS) is a valid and reliable measure of classroom community and learning. • Responses on Likert-Type Scale 1 to 5: Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree • 200 students responded in Fall 2012 and 37 students in Spring 2013 (Combined N=237)

  50. Students’ Perceptions of LC Experiences % Agree and Strongly Agree