Presentation on theme: ""High-Impact" Practices: What We Know about their Impact on Underserved Students Jayne E. Brownell Alma R. Clayton-Pedersen October 17, 2008."— Presentation transcript:
"High-Impact" Practices: What We Know about their Impact on Underserved Students Jayne E. Brownell Alma R. Clayton-Pedersen October 17, 2008
Literature Review Project What are the proven outcomes of 5 high impact activities? Learning communities Service learning Undergraduate research First-year seminars Capstone experiences Is there a differential impact on underserved student populations? What is the quality of this research? Where are the gaps?
In todays presentation… Do these results ring true with your experience? How might these results inform your own practice on your campus? What else do you need to know to make this information useful for your use?
Underserved Students Underrepresented students of color Low-income students First-generation students
Underrepresented Students of Color Now represent about 1 in 3 college students, compared to 17% in 1976 Students enrolled in postsecondary education immediately after high school: Latino: 46.9% African-American/Black: 52.7% Native American: 46% White students: 68.9% Asian-American students: 75.2% Still lag behind in rates of degree attainment
Low-Income students Less rigorous HS curriculum, likely to begin in a community college and to attend part time, and likely to be older, first-generation students Lowest quartile Highest quartile HS Graduate 69%93% Continued to college 40%81% Graduated from college 12%73%
First-Generation Students 22% of college students entering from 1992 to 2000 were first-generation Twice as likely to leave without a degree compared to those whose parents earned a bachelors degree Progress toward the degree at a slower rate, taking fewer classes and more stop outs
Types of Learning Communities Two or more linked courses on a common theme Linked courses with an extended orientation FYS Linked courses with an integrative seminar Residentially based or not (LLC) Cohorts could travel together class to class, or may be enrolled in larger classes and brought together for an attached seminar
Outcomes studied Positive impact on persistence Mixed or minimal impact on GPA Positive impact on: Transition to college Peer and faculty interaction Sense of belonging Levels of engagement, in and out of the classroom Perception of a supportive campus climate
Outcomes, continued Liberal education outcomes: Critical thinking Intellectual development Integrative thinking Reading/writing skills Open to new perspectives/ ideas Engagement with diversity Civic engagement Development of values and ethics
Outcomes for Underserved Students Higher grades and persistence Easier college transition More faculty and peer interaction Builds identity as a learner/ helps to find ones voice Sense of belonging Gains in intellectual development
Quality matters Selection of courses to link Gateway courses Addition of seminars Course design and goals for the classes Use of instructional teams Use of engaging pedagogies Classroom environment Faculty development
Service-Learning A form of experiential education that connects community based activities with opportunities that are intentionally designed to promote student learning and development (Jacoby 1996). Academic course or program with service component (not co-curricular volunteerism absent a curricular element).
Outcomes Studied Academic Outcomes Course grades and GPA Persistence Higher levels of academic engagement Gains in critical thinking, writing skills Civic Outcomes Civic behavior Social responsibility Social justice orientation Sense of self-efficacy Commitment to service-oriented career
Outcomes, continued Other Outcomes Gains in moral reasoning Greater tolerance/reduced stereotyping Greater interaction with faculty
Outcomes for Underserved Students Increased retention rates Better academic performance (grades) Positive changes in civic attitudes Negative experiences/ isolation due to orientation or nature of service-learning experience
Quality Matters Opportunities for structured reflection Faculty connects material with service experience Number of service hours Quality of service (e.g., contact with clients vs. paperwork) Supervision at site
Inquiry, creative activity, or scholarship conducted by undergraduates mentored by faculty (typically in major) Can be collaborative or individual project Intentional usage with underrepresented students– UROPs and SROPs
Outcomes Studied Persistence Graduate school enrollment Improvement in research skills Increased interaction with faculty and peers Gains in problem-solving and critical thinking Greater satisfaction with educational experience
Outcomes for Underserved Students Mostly limited to SROPs/UROPs Persistence Graduate school enrollment
Quality Matters Quality of faculty mentoring
Types of First-Year Seminars Extended orientation seminars Academic seminars with uniform content across sections Academic seminars with variable content Pre-professional or discipline-linked seminars Basic student skills seminars Hybrid
Outcomes studied Positive impact on persistence and graduation Minimal, short-term impact on GPA Positive impact on: Peer and faculty interaction Levels of engagement, in and out of the classroom Perception of a supportive campus climate Knowledge of campus resources Ability to manage ones time Multicultural awareness
Outcomes for Underserved Students Short-term benefits for grades and persistence No studies looked at other outcomes for these populations
Quality Matters Selection of FYS type based on goals Number of credits offered Use of instructional teams Use of engaging pedagogies Connections with learning communities, service-learning
Typically in senior year Can be a course, seminar, project (overlap with undergraduate research) Learning Focus: Learning in major (majority of capstones) or Learning over college career (general education – less common)
Outcomes Studied Most research involves description of capstone courses vs. examination of outcomes Some limited evidence for applying and integrating knowledge in major No studies identified related to underserved students
Assessment of the research Mostly single institution studies Tend to look at outcomes over a short span of time Limited range of outcomes studied Selection bias, lack of control groups, reliance on self-report measures Little information about the impact on underserved students
Recommendations for Future Research Study experiences of underserved students Expand outcomes research from just grades/persistence to student learning Work to eliminate selection bias Utilize comparison groups Longitudinal approaches
Back to our early questions Do these results ring true with your experience? How might these results inform your own practice on your campus? What else do you need to know to make this information useful for your use?
One more question… How are you, or could you, add to this body of knowledge based on the work youre doing on your campuses?
We would love your feedback The full draft document will be available for review from AAC&U