1. Creating a Comprehensive Early Warning System to Further Student Success and Retention Shane Hammond CCLA June, 2007

2.  Developmental Education Working Group  Academic Standing Review  Title III Grant Advising Initiatives Why this project? Why Now?

3. GCC Preliminary Report of Academic Deficiency  Created in the late 1980’s  Delivered to students over 8 weeks into the semester  No formal follow-up by advisor or Student Affairs  Sends a negative message to the student

4. Preliminary Report of Academic Deficiency

5. Project Goals  Consult with faculty, staff & students and obtain feedback for improvements  Review ‘Best Practices’ models of Early Warning Systems  Create a new form  Revise the current process and introduce tracking mechanisms  Pilot for spring 2007

6. Constituencies consulted during the development of the process included:  Dean of Student Affairs  Students  Registrar  Admissions  Career Center  Distance Learning  Disability Services  Academic Affairs (Dean, Associate Deans & faculty)  Academic Advising Center  Title III Pilot Faculty Advisors  Developmental Education Working Group  Next Step Up Site Coordinator  GED Examiner  Student Affairs Testing & Advising and Health & Wellness Clusters

7. Critical components of an Early Warning System based on review of models include:  a good tracking mechanism to gauge the type/extent of students’ needs  supportive and encouraging alert letters to students  human contact to supplement the letters  early delivery of alert letter balancing the needs of the instructor for assessment with the ability of the student to seek the necessary support services  faculty support & input

8. Development of the ‘Early Progress Report’  Includes feedback from across campus  Change in language, tone, format, and message  Designed to engage the student in a conversation about their progress  Emphasis on support services and academic advisor contact

9. Early Progress Report

10. Development of the EPR process  Title III Grant Faculty Pilot Group for spring 2007 identified  Deficiency Report replaced with the Early Progress Report  Updated class rosters with advisor contact information  Delivered to students three weeks into the semester (in person)  EPR coded to Banner using the mid term grading functionality  E-mail delivered to both student & academic advisor as automated follow-up  Hard copies mailed to advisor

11. E-mail message to student: Dear (student first name): I am concerned that you are experiencing academic difficulty in one or more of your courses. I urge you to discuss this situation with your academic advisor immediately. If you do not know the name of your advisor, please contact the Academic Advising Center in N209-213 at (413)775-1339. You may want to consider reducing your course load or reevaluate your personal schedule to allow you more time to focus on your academic work. There are a number of resources available to support you as you continue your education at Greenfield Community College which your advisor will be able to discuss with you. It is in your best interest to take advantage of these services as soon as possible and consider appropriate adjustments in your schedule as well. Please contact your academic advisor today! By taking prompt action now, you may avoid on- going academic difficulties that could jeopardize your success in achieving your goals. Regards, Shane Hammond Associate Dean of Student Affairs

12. E-mail message to the academic advisor: Dear (advisor’s first name): I am concerned for your advisee, (student full name & ID here). This student has received an Early Progress Report in one or more courses, which indicates that he/she is experiencing academic difficulty this semester. Please contact the student as soon as possible and schedule an appointment with him/her to discuss these concerns and provide him/her with appropriate resource referrals as necessary. It is in the student’s best interest to address this issue as soon as possible. Please feel free to contact me with any questions regarding this e-mail message. Thank you, Shane Hammond Associate Dean of Student Affairs

13. Spring 2007 Pilot Results  Participation by 13 faculty members  69 students received the EPR (12% of total # students in pilot group)  Poor student e-mail response  Positive e-mail response from academic advisors  Early results suggest moderate improvement  Future assessment needed using control groups

14. Student Outcomes: Spring 2007 EPR Pilot

15. Early Progress Report Pilot Assessment

16. Participating faculty feedback  EPR is more personal encouraging  Promotes better communication with the student  Timing may have been too early  Consider using at 4 weeks into the semester and again at mid-term  Account for milestone work vs. cumulative  The right process to support student success and retention

17. Next Steps  Replace the Preliminary Report of Academic Deficiency with EPR (fall, 2007)  Conduct a second pilot for further assessment using control groups (fall, 2007)  Present results to faculty and staff  Change academic calendar for spring 2008 to introduce earlier delivery (fall, 2007)  Work with IT to develop an on-line version of the EPR and enhance tracking methods  Implement the EPR and process campus-wide (spring, 2008)

18. THANK YOU! QUESTIONS?