E-Source for College Transitions | Vol. 16, No. 2 by National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience and Students in Transition

SOURCE

Vol. 16

For College Transitions

No. 2 March 2019

A publication from the National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience® and Students in Transition

CONTENTS 



Holistic Coaching, Targeted Support Help Low-Income Students Rise Above Purdue University combines financial aid and support programming to address an achievement gap, leading to improved graduation outcomes for students. 



Fostering Student Success Through Peer Supervision Models The University of Cincinnati and the University of Kentucky leverage peer leadership and student employment to develop models that allow both schools to scale up service using fewer resources. 



Increasing FYS Quality Through Greater Curricular Flexibility The University of South Carolina’s first-year seminar strikes a balance between consistency and flexibility for instructors. 



Making Internships High-Impact Through Online Coursework An internship course at Kennesaw State University aims for an increasingly impactful and reflective experience that boosts students’ potential in the workplace. 



Quest for Student Success: The Importance of Student Teaching Changes to tutoring at Middle Tennessee State University lead to increased rates of persistence and retention. 



Resource Spotlight: Building a Case for the First-Year Seminar Using a thorough literature review, a guide for course redesign and implementation, and other resources, a text for professionals gives a clear road map for those seeking to establish the FYS at their institutions.

Holistic Coaching, Targeted Support Help Low-Income Students Rise Above For years, first-generation and low-income Michelle Ashcraft Director, Purdue Promise students have graduated at lower rates than Andrea Mattingly their peers at Purdue University, a land-grant, Communications Director Purdue University public research institution that enrolls more than 32,000 undergraduates. This is particularly the case for Indiana 21st Century Scholars who enroll. Students in this program are identified as low-income and are more likely than their resident peers to be first-generation college students. These scholars apply in middle school to qualify for a tuition and fee scholarship guarantee if they graduate high school with a 2.5 GPA and remain drug- and crime-free. Before 2009, 21st Century Scholars were graduating at rates 10-11% lower than their Purdue peers. To address the achievement gap, Purdue Promise was launched in 2009 to serve 21st Century Scholars with a total family income threshold of $50,000 or less, with the goal of graduating students on time and debt-free. Purdue Promise is unique as it is both an access and a support program. While many programs at U.S. institutions provide financial aid or support programming, Purdue Promise intentionally combines both. The successful combination has led to institutional, statewide, and national recognition.

A Move to Proactive Coaching Purdue Promise staff quickly realized their students’ academic struggles had nothing to do with motivation or intelligence, and everything to do with life circumstances. Moreover, the program’s original support structure held nearly zero sway for those facing such overwhelming life experiences. Under the former model, students faced scholarship requirements that were heavily social and cohort-based, including peer mentoring, monthly events, workshops, numerous courses, tutoring, learning communities, and celebrations. The non-social components were prescribed, structured, and one-size-fits-all. These components did not address students’ individual academic struggles, their prior and current experiences, or the support students received elsewhere on campus. While this model worked for many students, for others some components were redundant or offered at the wrong time for their individual needs.

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

To improve students’ graduation prospects, in 2013 program leaders eliminated half of the scholarship requirements in favor of high-touch, proactive success coaching. Program leaders reallocated budgets for hundreds of student leaders to hire full-time student success coaches and make assistant directors supervisory. Today, eight full-time coaches each have a caseload of about 150 students per semester, and two assistant directors each serve 50 students on academic probation. Many staff members have master’s degrees in higher education, student affairs, social work, or counseling and receive extensive training—about 116 hours their first year. The training helps student success coaches address the academic side of their students’ lives as well as the complex issues that students face. Coaches also monitor students’ progress, help them find resources, and address problems that may affect their academic success and financial aid eligibility. The coaching model begins with required orientation and a first-year seminar, in which instructors are assigned as student success coaches. Students meet with their coaches at least once outside class their first semester. They continue to meet two to eight times per semester through their junior year, based on an internal color-coding system designed around 12 at-risk factors known to lead to academic probation and loss of scholarship for program participants. Students also complete three online modules per semester focused on the Dimensions of Wellness (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2017), a holistic approach to overall physical and mental health. Seniors take a seminar in the fall semester called Life After College, which students candidly call “Adulting 101.” Next to coaching, the senior seminar is the most highly rated service the program offers.

Increasing On-time, Debt-free Graduation The change to coaching has helped boost Purdue Promise students’ four-year graduation rate by more than 25 percentage points compared with the institution’s overall graduation rate increase of 13 percentage points in the same timeframe (Figure 1).

“The change to coaching has helped boost Purdue Promise students’ four-year graduation rate by more than 25 percentage points compared with the institution’s overall graduation rate increase of 13 percentage points in the same

”

timeframe.

Figure 1. Four-year graduation rate for Purdue Promise students compared with others.

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

After the program introduced coaching to the 2012 and 2013 cohorts, student success rates began to climb. In fact, new data show students from the 2014 cohort now graduate at a higher rate than the rest of the student body at Purdue. Of 292 Purdue Promise students who started in Fall 2014, almost 63% graduated within four years, compared with 60% of the Purdue student body as a whole. These students make up the first cohort to experience coaching from first to senior year. Their success directly correlates with the introduction of the coaching model. Beyond improved graduation prospects, 60% of the 2014 cohort graduated with no debt; those who did have debt took on less than the university average. Figure 2 represents indebtedness at graduation for Purdue Promise students from the 2013 and 2014 cohorts.

“Though traditionally labeled at-risk nationally, lowincome, firstgeneration, and underrepresented minority students

Figure 2. Rates of graduating without debt and average borrowing for students in Purdue Promise compared with resident undergraduates.

A reduced-cost study abroad program represents another way Purdue Promise is making college experiences more accessible and affordable. On average, students in Purdue Promise pay only 35% of the cost of a traditional short-term study abroad program, and most complete the trip (three weeks covering four cities in Spain) for $500 or less. Twenty students are selected for the program each year.

in Purdue Promise are graduating at higher rates than

”

their peers.

These students’ measurable academic gains are helping change the dialogue surrounding the student experience for low-income and first-generation groups. “There’s a misconception that students in Purdue Promise are underprepared or underqualified, but in reality they’ve had to meet the same academic standards as anyone else who was admitted to Purdue, often while overcoming other significant barriers,” said Jess Ramsey, the program’s assistant director. “Their success is especially meaningful when you consider the rippling impact it has on their siblings, families, friends back home, and their communities.” Nearly every student response to Purdue Promise’s annual senior survey calls the program “life-changing.” Responses go into glowing detail about the encouragement and support of the Purdue Promise success coaches.

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

Enhancing Diversity and Inclusion Outcomes

Reference

As of Fall 2018, 62% of students in the Purdue Promise program were first-generation compared with 21% of the Purdue undergraduate population; 27% identified as underrepresented minorities versus 10% of the undergraduate population. Thus, Purdue Promise students span vast intersecting identities and help diversify the student body.

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). (2017). The eight dimensions of wellness. Retrieved from https://www.samhsa.gov/wellnessinitiative/eight-dimensions-wellness

Though traditionally labeled at-risk nationally, low-income, first-generation, and underrepresented minority students in Purdue Promise are graduating at higher rates than their peers. The most recent four-year graduation rate for first-generation students in Purdue Promise was 57%; the undergraduate average at Purdue was 53%. Students who identified as underrepresented minorities in Purdue Promise earned a four-year graduation rate of 65%, compared with 52% for the Purdue undergraduate average.

Looking to the Future Purdue Promise serves twice as many students and coaches as it did in 2014, and the program continues to grow. Its recent achievements beg the question: What would it take to extend the coaching model and financial support to more of the university’s low-income and traditionally at-risk populations? Purdue Promise leaders aim to find out. A lofty goal would be to serve all low-income students in Indiana, but achieving that may mean incremental growth over time. Aligning with Purdue’s land-grant mission, program leaders hope to serve as many such students as possible. If improved graduation outcomes are any indication, though, holistic coaching and financial support for low-income students are investments worth making.

Contact Michelle Ashcraft mashcraf@purdue.edu

Related Articles in E-Source Apostolakis Miller, A. (2016, November). Supporting the transition and ongoing success of first-generation and lowincome students. 14(1), 9-12. Carr, J. M., Jackson, D. D., & Murphy, M. K. (2014, October). Using educationally purposeful activities to support first-generation college students in chemistry. 12(1), 4-7. Glaessgen, T. A., Wood, K. S., Biggs, M. M., & Darabi, R. L. (2018, December). Creating pathways to improve first-generation student success. 16(1), 16-19.

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

Fostering Student Success Through Peer Supervision Models

Lauren Rose Bosselait

The use of peers to support student learning in higher education has been growing in popularity for more than a decade (Shook & Keup, 2012). More recently, the idea of leveraging student employment as a high-impact practice (HIP) has been on the rise. In the Chronicle of Higher Education, Kuh (2010) argues that “contrary to long-held beliefs, findings from the 2008 National Survey of Student Engagement show that working is positively related to several dimensions of student engagement.” At the same time, many first-year support programs are under pressure to serve more students and make a larger impact on retention. Thus, departments that serve undergraduate students face the need to scale up service, albeit often with fewer or no additional resources.

Christie Maier

Associate Director, Learning Commons

University of Cincinnati Assistant Director, The Study

University of Kentucky

The University of Cincinnati (UC) and the University of Kentucky (UK) each faced this challenge and were forced to adapt. By leveraging peer leadership and student employment, two emerging high-impact practices, UC and UK each built a cost-effective and sustainable peer-to-peer supervision model that has positively impacted first-year retention. We implemented key strategies in developing a model that allowed our respective departments to scale up with fewer resources.

1. Support on a Large Scale Both UC and UK use peer education models in which undergraduate students supervise their peers. Peer leader coordinators (PLCs) provide peer-to-peer supervision for the peer leaders (PLs) who lead learning communities—zero-credit hour first-year seminars attached to 2-5 co-enrolled courses (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Organizational chart for peer education model at the University of Cincinnati. Return to Front Page Copyright © 2019 National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience® and Students in Transition, University of South Carolina

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

At UK, the centralized peer tutoring program, known as The Study, provides free drop-in tutoring for more than 30 entry-level math, science, and business courses (Figure 2). In order to provide support and supervision on a large scale, The Study employs seven to eight student program coordinators (SPCs) as peer-to-peer supervisors for more than 130 tutors on staff. In both cases, peer supervisors must have worked for the department previously, maintained a 3.0 GPA, and demonstrated the ability to balance work with academics, as well as prior leadership experience.

“Both UC and UK use a selection team who not only know the position well but Figure 2. Organizational chart for The Study, a peer tutoring program at the University of Kentucky.

2. Guiding Principles Models at both institutions follow three essential principles that guide the roles and responsibilities of students working as peer supervisors: • The students have a high level of passion, enthusiasm, and ownership regarding their work, making them valuable assets to a peer leadership program’s success. • The position is trusted with a high level of responsibility and autonomy, accomplished through structured training and ongoing support.

can provide diverse perspectives to assist with interviews and hiring decisions.

The University of Cincinnati’s peer leaders lead learning communities, zero-credit hour first-year seminars attached to co-enrolled courses. Photo courtesy of the University of Cincinnati.

• The position is designed as a HIP that has a trickle-down effect for first-year students.

”

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

3. In-Depth Selection Process Opportunities to serve as peer supervisors are advertised to student employees in each department. The selection process involves a comprehensive application that includes written materials (e.g., a statement of interest, cover letter, résumé) and an in-person, behavioral-based interview. Both UC and UK use a selection team who not only know the position well but can provide diverse perspectives to assist with interviews and hiring decisions. Before deciding whom to hire, the selection team reflects on group dynamics, recognizing that each candidate has strengths and areas for growth, with the aim of forming a balanced, well-rounded team.

4. Training Training dates for new hires are established early, so the dates can be included in the application and candidates know upfront when they will need to be available. Both institutions design training sessions intentionally and strategically around team building, group activities, and social times, laying the groundwork for a strong team. A team of peer supervisors needs to be able to trust and rely on one another, as well as their direct supervisor. Training at both institutions also includes an overview of program basics (e.g., policies, procedures, professionalism), as well as theoretical and pedagogical approaches that inform them. Both programs have also benefited from building in time for personal development sessions (e.g., detailing SMART goals, boundary setting, and supervision/ leadership styles) and shadowing opportunities. Finally, both programs include structured self-reflection for peer supervisors throughout training.

5. Ongoing Support and Development Being an excellent peer supervisor takes time and practice, making it essential that both programs provide continued support and ongoing personal and professional development. Because peer supervisors give so much of themselves to the program and the students they serve, both UK and UC want to reward them through personal and professional growth. This structure helps the peer supervisors feel valued and elevates the program’s credibility. PLCs and SPCs meet with their supervisors individually on a biweekly basis and in groups each week. The content of the individual meetings is similar: discussing personal well-being and accomplishments, issues with the position that warrant follow-up, and strategic questions about personal or professional development (e.g., goal setting, résumé review, CliftonStrengths for Students, True Colors, Myers-Briggs Type Indicator).

6. Targeted Feedback

“Deliberately designing, implementing, and maintaining a peer-supervision program has made it possible for both institutions to scale up services while also positively impacting student retention.

The final key strategy for a successful peer-to-peer supervision program ensures that the peer supervisor receives targeted, timely, and specific feedback—all hallmarks of a HIP. At the University of Cincinnati, PLCs receive mid-semester feedback, framed

”

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

as strengths and opportunities for growth, from three sources: (a) the students they supervise, (b) their colleagues (those holding the same position), and (c) their supervisor. They also receive a formal evaluation from their supervisor assessing 11 professional standards (e.g., problem-solving skills, communication skills, conflict-management skills, discretion) and statements from their supervisees and co-workers that reflect what those individuals have learned from them. The range of feedback helps peer supervisors realize the impact they have on others and the strengths they bring to a team, while aiding in their understanding of their leadership potential. At UK, SPCs receive feedback during biweekly one-on-one meetings with their supervisor and a formal evaluation at the end of each semester. In the formal evaluation, they are evaluated on successful completion of their job responsibilities (e.g., supervising the tutoring floor, supervising a team, secondary responsibility) and nine leadership competencies (e.g., strategic planning, inclusivity, feedback). SPCs also complete a selfevaluation in the fall semester before their first performance evaluation. This feedback allows them to create a Personalized Development Plan for targeting specific areas to work on in the spring semester.

Conclusion Although the UK and UC peer-to-peer supervision roles have existed for more than a decade, the models were only recently augmented to reflect the essential elements of HIPs. Deliberately designing, implementing, and maintaining a peer-supervision program has made it possible for both institutions to scale up services while also positively impacting student retention. Both the learning community program at UC and the peer tutoring program at UK serve a large portion of first-year and transitional students. At UC, nearly 65% of the incoming baccalaureate class enrolls in a learning community; the second-year retention rate for those enrolled in learning communities was 87.4%, compared with 83.8% for those not enrolled.

References Kuh, G. D. (2010, November 21). Maybe experience really can be the best teacher. Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/maybeexperience-really-can-be/125433 Shook, J., & Keup, J. (2012). The benefits of peer leader programs: An overview from the literature. In J. Keup & B. Barefoot (Eds.), New directions in high education: Peer leadership in higher education, 157, 5-16. https:// doi.org/10.1002/he.20002

Contact Lauren Bosselait bosselln@ucmail.uc.edu

Related Articles in E-Source Dial, M., & Stuart, S. (2018, April). Training first-year seminar peer leaders through extended orientation. 15(2), 8 Harper, M. S., & Allegretti, C. L. (2013, October). Expanding a peer-facilitation program beyond the fall term. 11(1), 16. Steinberg, J. (2003, October). Peer mentor program integral to the first-year experience. 1(2), 5.

During 2017-2018 at UK, The Study facilitated more than The centralized peer tutoring program at the University of 28,000 tutoring sessions, a third Kentucky provides free drop-in tutoring for more than 30 entry- of which included the first-year level courses. Photo courtesy of the University of Kentucky. cohort. For that cohort, fall-to-fall retention rates for those accessing The Study are consistently 10% higher than those who did not. Ultimately, both institutions have realized positive, high-volume impact because of deliberately structured peer-to-peer supervision programs.

Return to Front Page Copyright ÂŠ 2019 National Resource Center for The First-Year ExperienceÂŽ and Students in Transition, University of South Carolina

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

Increasing First-Year Seminar Quality Through Greater Curricular Flexibility The University of South Carolinaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s hallmark first-year seminar, University 101 (UNIV 101), is an extended orientation course that strives to help new students successfully transition to college, academically and personally. In Fall 2018, 4,500 students were enrolled in 245 sections, taught by 223 instructors. With a course offering of this size, it is critical to strike the appropriate balance between consistency across sections and flexibility for instructors.

Daniel B. Friedman Director, University 101 Programs

Sandy Greene Program Coordinator, University 101 Programs University of South Carolina

In their classic work on college curriculum development, Stark and Lattuca (1997) suggested that course curricula or academic plans contain several elements, including the purpose, content, sequence, instructional processes, instructional resources, and evaluation, as well as the ability to adjust the plan. When navigating multiple section offerings of a first-year seminar, a key decision academic leaders have to make is how much flexibility to give instructors in these areas within their courses. Some first-year seminars use a standard syllabus for all sections that prescribes not only the outcomes to be achieved, but also the topics to be covered, when they are to be covered, and the assignments to measure what is learned. While our university wants students to have a consistent experience across sections, we recognize the limitations of overly prescribing an academic plan. Though greater restrictions may yield consistency, they may also result in a student experience that is consistently average. In an effort to push classes past average and toward exceptional, we favor flexibility for instructors over consistency across sections. The course has three broad goals with 10 learning outcomes (see Figure 1, p. 10). Each section has an enrollment limit of 19 students and is co-taught by a faculty or staff member and an upper-division peer leader. While instructors must develop their course around the same 10 learning outcomes, they can select their own content, sequencing, and assignments, as long as they meet those outcomes. We do use a common textbook to help apply some degree of consistency, but instructors can choose the chapters most relevant for their course design and student needs. This approach has proven successful, as improvements on overall course effectiveness over time indicate (see Figure 1). This construct, from the First-Year Seminar Assessment, a national benchmarking instrument, evaluates the degree that students report the course (a) included interesting subject matter, (b) contributed to their ability to succeed academically, (c) contributed to their ability to adjust to the college social environment, (d) covered topics important to the student, and (e) is one to recommend to other firstyear students. The assessment is administered online to UNIV 101 students at the end of the fall semester. Questions let students indicate their perceptions of the course and their learning, using a 7-point Likert scale (where 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree).

Return to Front Page Copyright ÂŠ 2019 National Resource Center for The First-Year ExperienceÂŽ and Students in Transition, University of South Carolina

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

Figure 1. Overall UNIV 101 course effectiveness by year, 2008-2017.

UNIV 101 has several reasons for giving instructors flexibility to build their own syllabus and course plan. First, we believe each course is only as good as the person teaching, and that person is only as good as their interest and investment in what they are doing. Allowing instructors flexibility to tailor course material to their interests and expertise promotes creativity, innovation, and an excitement for teaching. While consistency is nice, a “course in a can” model that is overly prescriptive can stifle creativity and diminish instructor enthusiasm. For students to be excited to learn and participate fully in the course, instructors must be excited to teach. Second, if we required instructors to follow a standard syllabus, it would imply that there is only one right way to teach the course—and that we know what that way is. Both assumptions are improbable. Giving instructors autonomy in determining lesson plans and content, if coupled with assessment and faculty development, allows for innovation. With this in mind, assessment guides all areas of UNIV 101 faculty development. In addition to occasional direct assessment, the first-year seminar uses two indirect assessment tools. The End-of-Course Evaluation assesses student perceptions of the course, while the First-Year Seminar Assessment measures student perceptions of their learning. While UNIV 101 acknowledges the limitations of using assessment based primarily on students’ perceptions, the results of these instruments guide faculty development in three main ways. First, they provide helpful feedback to individual instructors and can serve as a coaching tool. Second, the results not only highlight how well the course is working (University of South Carolina, n.d.-a) but also help to determine why by identifying teaching strategies that have been most successful. UNIV 101 staff interview the top-performing instructors for each learning outcome (using both direct and indirect measures of learning) to determine why their approaches were successful. Those strategies (ranging from lesson plans to specific activities) are then shared with instructors through faculty development events and instructor support materials (Friedman, 2012). For example, each instructor receives the Faculty Resource Manual (University of South Carolina, n.d.-b), a guide on “how to design, manage, and teach a first-year seminar and evaluate student work.”

“While instructors must develop their course around the same 10 learning outcomes, they can select their own content, sequencing, and assignments, as long as they meet

”

those outcomes.

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

This manual is updated annually by UNIV 101 staff and includes lesson plans, resources, and information about the course learning outcomes (see Figure 2, p. 12). Using the strategies described, instructors can select the methods and topics best suited for their students. In this way, instructor flexibility leads to resource sharing, thus fostering innovation and improvement. The third reason such flexibility is important relates to the diverse needs of learners. While instructor excitement and enthusiasm are important, the experience is not about what gets instructors excited, but about meeting students’ needs. As noted in the UNIV 101 course requirements (University of South Carolina, n.d.-c), the broad nature of these outcomes signifies that no one approach may be appropriate for all students. The content, topics, and methods used to achieve outcomes should be tailored to the needs of the students in a given section and to the strengths and expertise of the instructor. With such a large enrollment, one size will not fit all. Instructors can gauge their students’ needs through a variety of methods: • Journals. When assigning journals, instructors can either ask specific, open-ended prompts or allow students to free-write. Both ways allow students to reflect on and write about their experiences and can give instructors valuable insight into students’ needs. Since journals are informal and are only shared between student and instructor, students are more likely to disclose openly. • Check-ins. Along with helping to build community at the beginning of class, check-ins are a helpful way for instructors to gauge how students are doing. Instructors can use a variety of prompts to facilitate a check-in (e.g., asking students to share the high or low moments of their week, asking them to use a hashtag to describe their week). Such activities often highlight the needs of individual students as well as those of the class as a whole. When individuals share this information, instructors can also see other students in the classroom agreeing, either verbally or through body language. • Syllabus quizzes. Giving a syllabus quiz at the beginning of the semester measures students’ understanding of the syllabus and can serve as a needs assessment. When instructors ask open-ended questions (e.g., “Why are you taking this course?”, “Which topics are you most excited to discuss?”), students’ answers can give valuable insight into what they would like to learn or experience throughout the semester. • One-on-one meetings. Meeting one on one allows instructors to get to know students on an individual level and to dive deeper using follow-up questions. Additionally, as students grow more comfortable through these meetings, they are more likely to share their experiences, successes, and challenges.

“The content, topics, and methods used to achieve outcomes should be tailored to the needs of the students in a given section and to the strengths and expertise of the instructor. With such a large enrollment, one size will not

”

fit all.

Finding Appropriate Balance While providing autonomy to instructors to develop their own course and lessons, the university is careful not to let them teach whatever they want. We will not mitigate course integrity and efficacy by sacrificing what students need to learn to accommodate Return to Front Page Copyright © 2019 National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience® and Students in Transition, University of South Carolina

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

what faculty want to teach. We have found that a set of broad common learning outcomes and course requirements makes for a suitable compromise between flexibility for instructors and consistency across sections, with the idea that the UNIV 101 course provides an opportunity for outcomes to be achieved rather than simply topics to be covered.

UNIV 101 Course Goals and Learning Outcomes I. Foster academic success As a result of this course, students will • adapt and apply appropriate academic strategies to their courses and learning experiences; • identify and apply strategies to effectively manage time and priorities; and • identify relevant academic policies, processes, and resources related to their academic success and timely attainment of degree requirements. II. Discover and connect with the University of South Carolina As a result of this course, students will • identify and use appropriate campus resources and engage in opportunities that contribute to their learning within and beyond the classroom; • develop positive relationships with peers, staff, and faculty; and • describe the history, purpose, and traditions of the University of South Carolina. III. Promote personal development, well-being, and social responsibility As a result of this course, students will • clarify their values and identity and articulate how these shape their perspectives and relationships with people who are similar to and different from themselves, • explore the tenets of the Carolinian Creed, • examine and develop strategies that promote well-being and explain how wellness impacts their academic and personal success, and • initiate a process toward attaining personal and professional goals and articulate potential pathways to employability.

Figure 2. Course goals, learning outcomes emphasized in University 101

References Friedman, D. (2012). The first-year seminar: Designing, implementing, and assessing courses to support student learning and success: Vol. V. Assessing the first-year seminar. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina, National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience and Students in Transition. Stark, J. S., & Lattuca, L. R. (1997). Shaping the college curriculum: Academic plans in action. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. University of South Carolina. (n.d.-a). University 101’s impact on academic success & persistence. Retrieved from https://sc.edu/about/ offices_and_divisions/university_101/ research_and_assessment/impact/index. php University of South Carolina. (n.d.-b). Instructor development. Retrieved from https:// sc.edu/about/offices_and_divisions/university_101/instructors/instructor_professional_development/ University of South Carolina. (n.d.-c). University 101 requirements. Retrieved from https:// sc.edu/about/offices_and_divisions/ university_101/courses/university_101_requirements/index.php

Contact Dan Friedman friedman@sc.edu

Related Articles in E-Source Bledsoe, R. (2014, October). The studentfaculty connection: Establishing relationships in the first-year seminar. 12(1), 14-16. Haug-Belvin, T., & Baranovic, K. (2017, December). Faculty see benefits of teaching first-year seminar. 15(1), 5.

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

Making Internships High-Impact Through Online Coursework Internships provide valuable and necessary experiential learning situations for students to begin shaping their professional identities. The literature suggests these experiences are not just beneficial in terms of career preparation but are also instrumental in growing students’ interpersonal communication skills and even intercultural competencies (Aldas, Crispo, Johnson, & Price, 2010; Simons et al., 2012). In fact, in one of the few studies involving student perception of high-impact educational practices (HIPs), students considered internships the most engaging of the HIPs. Students reported working harder and participating more actively in internships than in other HIPs, such as servicelearning or learning communities (Miller, Rycek, & Fritson, 2011). When it came time to develop a new internship course for integrative studies majors at Kennesaw State University, we created what we believe is a high-impact pedagogical framework for students’ experiential learning that balances academic learning, interaction, and reflection. The following discussion provides an overview of our development of the course and our ongoing study of its effectiveness.

Rationale and Methods When our Leadership and Integrative Studies department sought to expand our integrative studies offerings to include a degree completion option, the deciding factor was whether it would maximize students’ readiness for entering the workforce. To meet this expectation, we required students entering the track to complete additional courses in oral and written communication, leadership studies, information technology, and a senior capstone course. We also wanted to be sure the students could complete an internship, if desired, even though they would be entering the general studies track with differing academic preparation and career aspirations. In designing an internship course for our majors, we wanted it to cover themes with broad professional applicability, as well as opportunities for collaboration and reflection that distinguish HIPs. HIPs are a central component of Kennesaw State’s ongoing efforts to provide transformative learning experiences for students through first-year seminars, learning communities, service-learning, and internships. Within University College, which houses our integrative studies major, students who pursue internships can stay true to their customized degree plans and intern at a variety of sites. Therefore, to develop an internship course that would most benefit students, we selected learning objectives that would be applicable to career development in any setting. These include the following: 1. Demonstrate a professional work ethic and behaviors while working with others in the workplace environment.

Deborah Mixson-Brookshire Associate Professor of Management, Distance Learning Coordinator

Mike Keleher Assistant Dean for Retention and Academic Success, Associate Professor of English Kennesaw State University

“In designing an internship course for our majors, we wanted it to cover themes with broad professional applicability, as well as opportunities for collaboration and reflection that

”

distinguish HIPs.

2. Effectively describe, in oral and written form, their experiences in the workplace in a critical and reflective manner.

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

3. Identify the knowledge, skills, and values they possess in order to determine the most suitable post-baccalaureate professional and educational context for their future. 4. Contribute to discussion on a range of topics relevant to professional development (e.g., interpersonal relations, ethics, group dynamics). In describing HIPs, Kuh, O’Donnell, and Reed (2013) point out that they must involve significant effort, collaboration, and reflection on the student’s part as well as opportunities for peers and instructors to provide rich feedback. Thus, in selecting course content for the internship course, we created assignments and activities in which students could reflect and collaborate as they explored common workplace issues, such as ethical dilemmas and interpersonal communication. Because so much of students’ time would be spent off campus, we decided on online course delivery as the most appropriate method to frame and enhance the learning that accompanies participation in an internship. The academic components of the course centered on workplace-related themes (e.g., flexibility, diversity, ethics) that were explored in a textbook on internships (Sweitzer & King, 2009), then shared in the students’ discussion board conversations. To frame their internship experiences, students developed personalized Experiential Learning Contracts, which outlined their goals for the course and action steps for reaching them. From there, in order to best synthesize course content with their site work, we sequenced the assignments and assessments to parallel the internship experience (see Figure 1).

“Our aim was to facilitate the transition from college to the workplace while building each student’s sense of well-being as a learner and team

”

member. Figure 1. Course activities and assignments followed the progression of students’ internships.

Once we had a satisfactory course design and set of learning objectives, we developed surveys to go out at the beginning and end of the term. Along with student discussions and reflections, these would provide a basis for determining the observed and (for the students) perceived benefits of the course. By looking at pilot data, we sought to determine the efficacy of the online course in giving students the knowledge and

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

context necessary for maximizing the internship experience. Our aim was to facilitate the transition from college to the workplace while building each student’s sense of wellbeing as a learner and team member.

Findings and Implications The participants in this pilot study were 33 students enrolled in four internship courses in Summer 2017, Fall 2017, Spring 2018, and Summer 2018. The courses were taught each semester, online and asynchronously. The majority of students were 18-29 and had taken an online course before. Though we offered a pre- and post-survey of student attitudes and preferences, there were no statistical differences in the participants’ responses. However, when we asked students to choose the four most useful course components for learning course materials (out of 11 listed), most selected online content (e.g., videos, lectures), discussion boards/assignments, interaction with colleagues and supervisor, and instructor feedback. The prioritization of these elements by the students not only intersected with our course objectives and learning outcomes but also with those described in the literature on HIPs (Kuh et al., 2013; Miller et al., 2011). We continue to survey students at the beginning and end of the semesters in which they enroll in the course. Our hope is that this multisemester iterative study will lead to an increasingly impactful and reflective internship experience that increases students’ potential for future success in the workplace. By meeting the diverse needs of our students and preparing them to transition into graduate school or a career, we continue to enhance our internship course by allowing them to read, work, respond, and reflect on their experiences. One student in the course articulated the potential for this practice: The course helped me to be more conscious of my work performance and realistically evaluate my internship site and my job. It helped me not to judge, but to be constructive and understanding. Sometimes [it] is not about the job place but about changing strategies to improve a system, a task, and even interrelationships at work and even out of work. We contend that our online internship course, structured and facilitated with HIPs in mind, provides students a rigorous and engaging opportunity for learning and maturation as they transition from college to the workplace.

References Aldas, T., Crispo, V., Johnson, N., & Price, T. A. (2010). Learning by doing: The Wagner plan from classroom to career. Peer Review, 12(4), 24-28. Kuh, G. D., O’Donnell, K., & Reed, S. (2013). Ensuring quality & taking high-impact practices to scale. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities. Miller, R. L., Rycek, R. F., & Fritson, K. (2011, December). The effects of high-impact learning experiences on student engagement. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 53-59. Simons, L., Fehr, L., Blank, N., Connell, D., Fernandez, D., & Peterson, V. (2012). Lessons learned from experiential learning: What do students learn from a practicum/internship? International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 24(3), 325-334. Sweitzer, F. H., & King, M. (2009). The successful internship: Personal, professional, and civic development in experiential learning. Belmont, CA: Cengage.

Contact Deborah Mixson-Brookshire dmixson@kennesaw.edu

Related Articles in E-Source Kohng, R., & Martin, J. K. (2018, December). The catalyst semester: High-impact educational practices in the city. 16(1), 4-7. Maietta, H. (2010, January). Job club helps seniors transition to the world of work. 7(3), 1-3.

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

Quest for Student Success: The Importance of Student Tutoring

Cornelia Wills Director of Student Success Middle Tennessee State University

Middle Tennessee State University (MTSU) has made improving student retention and graduation outcomes a top priority. In 2013, in response to low graduation and retention rates, the university adopted Quest for Student Success, a comprehensive, strategic initiative designed to improve these and other outcomes. With the end goal of degree completion in mind, we set out to remove barriers to student success. This process involved four main strategies: (a) advisor enhancements, (b) communication plans, (c) course redesign, and (d) tutoring. Advisor enhancements resulted in 40 additional advisors hired to reduce the student-to-advisor ratio; communication plans gave At Middle Tennessee State University, junior Jaylon Britt, left, tutors way to more innovative, datasophomore Raven Beverley at the Tutoring Spot in Walker Library. Photo courtesy of Middle Tennessee State University. informed practices; course redesign revamped general education courses with higher-than-average failure rates; and centralized tutoring provided students more learning support opportunities. This article outlines how changes to tutoring at MTSU have led to increased rates of persistence and retention, particularly for first-year and sophomore students.

How Tutoring Evolved Research suggests tutoring at colleges and universities is an essential resource for enhancing student academic performance and persistence (Arco-Tirado, FernándezMartin, & Fernández-Balboa, 2011). An initial review of tutoring services at MTSU found that tutoring was decentralized and occurred in only some departments. MTSU administrators discussed a centralized tutoring concept in 2012, spurred by research suggesting that such support is one of the best resources a college can offer students (Boylan, Bliss, & Bonham, 1997; Henry Ford Community College, April 2011). A pilot, serving 140 courses and housed in a dedicated space at the library, was launched in 2013. The space was positioned to be visible to students entering the facility. The pilot did not require a specific number of participants and was open to students in all class levels and majors. Courses for tutoring were selected across colleges and included many general education courses and others in which students tend to struggle (e.g., chemistry, math, physics, history, biology). MTSU did not track student usage or assessment in the pilot phase. No final push was necessary for full implementation, which began in Spring 2014, as tutoring was already a component of the Quest.

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

Elevating Awareness As is the case at many institutions, we found that some students were unaware that tutoring was available at MTSU. To remedy this, we took measures to draw attention to the tutoring center through a festive event, MTSU Flips over Tutoring (MTSU, 2017), which featured sign twirlers in front of the library. The MTSU president, provost, deans, and other top administrators participated in this innovative and highly successful “flipping” event, which included an informational tent, music, refreshments, and tutoring swag. The university has also implemented other methods to increase student awareness of tutoring, including • yard signs (placed in high-traffic areas) • napkin holders (in key eating venues)

26% more firstyear students, 10%

• postcards (at university events) • fliers (in strategic areas and at university events), and

more sophomores,

• outreach via social media (primarily Facebook). An online database (MTSU, n.d.) is also available to help students find available tutoring opportunities.

“For (Fall 2017),

90% more juniors, At left, junior Jonathan Adams is tutored by graduate student Victor Barnes in Middle Tennessee State University’s accounting laboratory. Photo courtesy of Middle Tennessee State University.

Implementation and the Process Though tutoring occurs in other locations, the central location (Tutoring Spot) in the library provides students easy access with their MTSU ID. Peer tutors, selected by academic departments and the student success director, along with graduate assistants from the featured academic departments, provide the tutoring services, which are free to students. The length of the sessions vary depending on students’ needs but typically last one hour. Peer tutors receive annual training before the fall semester. Because of MTSU’s large student population (about 22,000), a college liaison, primarily an associate dean, represents each college that offers tutoring. Liaisons meet periodically with the director of student success regarding updates and other issues. The student success director also meets with peer tutors as needed. A monthly budget report is sent to each liaison so each area can monitor their tutoring expenditures.

and 10% more seniors made an A when they received study skills tutoring than those who

”

did not.

Boosting Study Skills Some students come to MTSU without a good foundation for studying. Recognizing this, MTSU developed a track to help with basic study skills and learning strategies in Fall 2016. The study skills program has been extremely successful and experienced tremendous growth, with usage increasing by 144% since its inception. Early indicators Return to Front Page Copyright © 2019 National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience® and Students in Transition, University of South Carolina

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

show higher GPAs for students who attended tutoring in study skills compared with a similar group who did not. For Fall 2017, a significantly higher percentage of students in the first group earned an A compared with a matched sample of those who did not participate in the study skills track. For that semester, 26% more first-year students, 10% more sophomores, 90% more juniors, and 10% more seniors made an A when they received study skills tutoring than those who did not. Additionally, we found that some students were having trouble navigating the D2L (Desire2Learn) cloud-based platform for their coursework, so in Fall 2017 we added this as well as reflective writing assistance into the study skills track. The school received a Tennessee Board of Regents Student Engagement, Retention, and Success grant for the 2018-2019 academic year to implement peer e-portfolio tutoring and launched this initiative as a pilot for Fall 2018.

Measuring Success We measure success of our program in three ways: (a) utilization, (b) student retention, and (c) grades.

Utilization When students who go for tutoring swipe their IDs, their information feeds into MTSU’s Banner system to generate usage reports. Based on the most recent data from Fall 2017, measures of tutoring utilization—total sessions and hours spent—grew 74% and 78%, respectively, over the prior fall semester (Table 1). From 2015-2017, the total sessions and hours spent in tutoring grew by 126% and 120%, respectively. Table 1 Growth of Tutoring Program Usage at MTSU 2015

2016

2017

Total sessions

4,892

6,338

11,040

Hours spent

7,082

8,735

15,557

Retention Data show tutoring has positively impacted student retention at MTSU, particularly at the first-year and sophomore levels. For Fall 2016, both classes were retained at a rate 17 percentage points higher than those in the comparative group that did not go to tutoring. Similarly, in Fall 2017, the rate was 14 percentage points higher for first-year students and 16 percentage points higher for sophomores who participated in tutoring.

“MTSU administrators discussed a centralized tutoring concept in 2012, spurred by research suggesting that such support is one of the best resources a college can offer

”

students.

Grades Based on Fall 2017 data, out of 2,577 unique tutoring participants, about 95% passed all of the courses in which they were tutored. Almost 90% passed with a C or higher; 66% earned a B or higher; and 32% earned an A.

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

Implications Most recently, MTSU integrated with the Education Advisory Board’s (EAB) Student Success Collaborative (SSC) Campus platform. SSC is a web-based system that houses areas, such as advising and tutoring, and can track tutoring activity, including usage. Unfortunately, it is too soon to gauge the effects of the new system, as tutoring at MTSU was integrated into SSC Campus (now called Navigate) in Fall 2018. Strategies implemented at MTSU to grow the tutoring program and, subsequently, increase retention and persistence rates, can easily be adopted at other institutions to achieve similar goals.

SOURCE

References Arco-Tirado, J. L.; Fernandez-Martin, F. D.; & Fernandez-Balboa, J. (2011). The impact of a peer-tutoring program on quality standards in higher education. Higher Education, 62, 773. Retrieved from https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10734-011-9419-x Boylan, H. R., Bliss, L. B., & Bonham, B. S. (1997, Spring). Program components and their relationship to student performance. Reprinted from the Journal of Developmental Education, 20, 3. Retrieved from https:// ncde.appstate.edu/sites/ncde.appstate. edu/files/Program%20Components.pdf Henry Ford Community College. (2011, April). Tutoring taskforce recommendations. Retrieved from https://learnlab.hfcc.edu/ files/ttfreportfinaldraft06.22.2011.pdf

Call for Submissions E-Source for College Transitions is accepting submissions for future issues. E-Source is published three times a year. The submission deadline for our last issue of 2019, due out in November, is May 10. Our first issue of 2020 has a submission deadline of September 9, 2019. Articles on a variety of topics related to student tranexperiences, programs, or courses; sitions are welcome, including those focusing on • innovative teaching strategies; • descriptions of institutional initiatives with • strategies for addressing first-year, sophomore, demonstrated results; and senior, and transfer transitions; • alternative funding sources for curricular initia• strategies for assessing student learning or tives, programs, and services.

Middle Tennessee State University. (n.d.). Free tutoring at MTSU. Retrieved from https:// mtsu.edu/studentsuccess/tutoring.php Middle Tennessee State University. (2017, March 21). MT flips over tutoring [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=mvTZAa1wHkM

Submission Guidelines

Contact

For complete guidelines and issue dates, see http://www.sc.edu/fye/esource

Cornelia Wills Cornelia.Wills@mtsu.edu

Audience: E-Source readers include academic and student affairs administrators and faculty from a variety of fields. Style: Articles, tables, figures, and references should adhere to APA (American Psychological Association) style.

Format: Submissions should be submitted online as a Microsoft Word attachment. Length: Original feature-length articles should be 750-1,200 words. Annotations of new resources should be no more than 500 words. The editor reserves the right to edit submissions for length.

Please address all questions and submissions to: Christina Hardin, Editor National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience & Students in Transition Email: esource@mailbox.sc.edu

Editorial Board Members Marsha Butler, Valencia College - West Campus

Charles Haberle, Providence College

Rebecca Campbell, Northern Arizona University

Andrew Lee, Fort Valley State University

Kevin Clarke, Loyola University Chicago

Amelia Noel-Elkins, Illinois State University

Mike Dial, University of South Carolina

Kelly Smith, Springfield College

Crystal Edmonds, Robeson Community College

Elizabeth Turton, Miami University

Richard Gebauer, Cabrini University

Scott Wojciehowski, High Point University

Related Articles in E-Source Cuseo, J. (2010, March). Peer power: Empirical evidence for the positive impact of peer interaction, support, and leadership. 7(4), 4-6. Harmon, K. L. (2018, August). Collaborative study sessions support student success. 15(3), 8-10. Harris, K., & Edwards, T. (2016, November). Impact of peer connections on medical student success. 14(1), 16-18.

SOURCE

Vol. 16

No. 2

March 2019

Return to Front Page

Sabrina Mathues

Resource Spotlight: Building a Case for the First-Year Seminar

Instructor, Innovation and Learning Resources

Why the First-Year Seminar Matters: Helping Students Choose and Stay on a Career Path (2018) is a professional resource for coordinators and advocates seeking to make a case for the first-year seminar (FYS) at their institutions. The combined practical expertise of author Christine Harrington, a nationally known FYS advocate, and co-author Theresa Orosz, an accomplished FYS instructor and community college administrator, positions this book among the few that not only build a strong case for their call to action, but support that case with a clear road map of activities that professionals can undertake.

Reference

Harrington and Orosz deliver a thorough literature review of the history and evidence-based value of FYS, from its conception to the most recent calls for its reform as a component of the guided pathways movement. The book provides an extensive resource list and infographics that readers can use in their own efforts to support FYS. It illustrates the seminar’s impact on increased retention and graduation rates and on affective experiences (e.g., sense of belonging) in detail and supports an emerging urgency to both establish and require FYS at scale across institutions. The text uniquely frames the argument for an FYS requirement within the context of establishing equity. Accordingly, the authors emphasize the role of FYS in the exchange of cultural capital, noting that students—particularly those who are most disadvantaged—do not capitalize on optional supports.

The text further builds a case for how FYS either meets or can be redesigned to fit the guided pathways goals of helping students choose and then stay on a path, emphasizing the need for learning outcomes and activities in FYS to elevate the role of career exploration and decision making. Why the First-Year Seminar Matters provides related career theories and suggested topics for discussion in the course to support the case for a robust, rigorous FYS focused on developing career literacy and self-efficacy.

Brookdale Community College

Harrington, C., & Orosz, T. (2018). Why the first-year seminar matters: Helping students choose and stay on a career path. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Contact Sabrina Mathues smathues@brookdalecc.edu

Related Articles in E-Source Harrington, C. (2011, October). Using peerreviewed research to teach academic study skills in first-year seminars. 9(1), 15-17. Young, D. G. (2013, October). Research spotlight: National evidence of the assessment of first-year seminars: How and how much? 11(1), 18-19.

SOURCE E-Source for College Transitions (ISSN 15455742) is published three times a year by the National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience and Students in Transition at the University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208. The National Resource Center has as its mission to support and advance efforts to improve student learning and transitions into and through higher education. The First-Year Experience® is a service mark of the University of South Carolina. A license may be granted upon written request to use the term The First-Year Experience. This license is not transferable without the written approval of the University of South Carolina. The University of South Carolina is an equal opportunity institution.

Part II of the volume gives a practical guide for FYS course redesign and implementation in accordance with the recommendations from Part I. Employing backward course design principles, the authors lead readers through the process of establishing learning outcomes, to developing course content, to applying appropriate teaching methods. Harrington and Orosz then turn their attention to those who are facing or will face the challenge of championing FYS at their campus, walking readers through Kotter’s eight stages of leading a transformative change process as applied to making the case for FYS.

Christina Hardin

In short, this text is a must-have reference for those seeking to positively impact student success measures at scale, with the idea that FYS is vital to that cause.

Tracy L. Skipper

Publications Staff E-Source Editor

Todd Money Editor

Andi Breeland & Stephanie McFerrin Graphic Designers

Assistant Director for Publications

Jennifer Keup Return to Front Page

Director

E-Source for College Transitions | Vol. 16, No. 2

Articles inside

Resource Spotlight: Building a Case for the First-Year Seminar

Quest for Student Success: The Importance of Student Tutoring

Making Internships High-Impact Through Online Coursework

Increasing First-Year Seminar Quality Through Greater Curricular Flexibility

Fostering Student Success Through Peer Supervision Models

Holistic Coaching, Targeted Support Help Low-Income Students Rise Above