The Effect of Supplemental Instruction on Transfer Student Success in STEM Courses National Institute for the Study of Transfer Students January 26, 2012 Marty Bonsangue, Mark Filowitz, James Hershey, Hye Sun Moon, Ed Sullivan, and Sean Walker This study was funded in part by the National Science Foundation

California State University Fullerton Second largest univ. in the 23-campus CSU system – >35,000 students enrolled – 57% Female – HSI Status – Ethnic Distribution- Fall 2011 Hispanic 32% White 30% Asian/Pacific Islander 22% African American 3% Indian, Multiple Race Non-Hispanic, International Students and Unknown 13% Admit approx. 5,000-6,000 transfer students per year

Biology 171 Evolution and Biodiversity First course in the Biology Major at CSUF Large lecture – 180 to 240 students per class 40 – 60% Success Rate Topics & Skills – Organismal Diversity – Microevolution – Macroevolution – Descriptive Statistics, Presentations, Scientific Writing

Math 150A – Calculus I First course in the Math, Computer Science, and Engineering Majors at CSUF Small classes – 25 to 40 students per class 30 – 60% Success Rate Topics & Skills – Functions – Derivatives and Integrals – Applications – Presentations, Mathematical Writing

What is Supplemental Instruction? Developed at University of Missouri at Kansas City Targets Tough Classes, NOT Students or Professors (< 70% passing rates) Difficult Material, not Evil Professor

More on SI Four Key Players – SI Supervisor – Faculty – SI Leaders – Students Leaders are trained, go to class and model good student behavior, and meet regularly with supervisor and faculty

Bio 171 SI Leaders Fall 2011

SI at CSUF Began in 2008 with four classes (2 secs Calculus I, 2 secs Biodiversity) In Spring 2012, approx 800 STEM students participating across 45 sections Forty-five undergrad SI leaders involved CollAlg, Precalc, BusCalc, Calc 1 & 2, Biodiversity, GenChem, OChem, & CompSci All students enrolled in course are actively invited and recruited

Summary of SI Results Success rates around 80 % (SI) v. 50 % (non-SI) GPA around 2.5 (SI) v. 1.7 (non-SI) Significant results for each ethnic and gender group Strongest effects observed for URM students and transfer students No differences in academic predictors for SI and non-SI students (overall & within groups)

Focus on Calculus I Calc I Data: Fall 2008-Spr 2011

Native Students Course Grade Calc I Course Grade: URM by SI Partic.

Native Students Calc I Success Rate: URM by SI Partic.

Transfer Students Academic Predictors Non SI SI No. of Students Transfer GPA

Transfer Students Only Calculus I Results Non SI SI Course Grade Success Rate45 %79 %

Transfer Students Calc I Course Grade: URM by SI Partic.

Transfer Students Calc I Success Rate: URM by SI Partic.

Transfer Students Calc I Course Grade: Ethnic. by SI Partic.

Transfer Students Calc I Success Rate: Ethnic. by SI Partic.

Transfer Students Calc I Grade: Gender by SI Partic.

Transfer Students Calc I Succ. Rate: Gender by SI Partic.

Summary Si participation linked with higher passing rate and course grade for all groups (ethnicity, gender, transfer status) No academic predictor differences between SI and non-SI students Most dramatic results observed for URM transfer students (based on limited sample) Exit survey shows 90 % + students overall feel SI was helpful or extremely helpful

Future Directions SI Helps Level the Playing Field for Students by Gender, Ethnicity, and Transfer Status SI is Building an Academic Program for Future Teachers (SI Leaders) The Results Make a Strong Case for Institutional Funding

Issues and Challenges Efficiently Identifying Transfer Students Enrolled in a STEM course Effectively Recruiting Transfer Students in a Timely Way Consistently Funding and Staffing Strong SI Programs in STEM

Thank You!