Interventions to Promote Community College Transfer Student Success at a Four-year, Online University

Interventions to Promote Community

College Transfer Student Success at a

Four-year, Online University

AACRAO Technology and Transfer Conference Fort Lauderdale, Florida

Denise Nadasen, AVP Institutional Research Alexandra List, Research Associate

Today’s Presentation

• Transfer student success

• Kresge project framework

• Intervention development,

implementation, and results

• Conclusions

Context

• Community college students comprise 45% of undergraduate students

• Only 15% of transfer students complete a degree within 6 years

• First semester of transfer from community

college to four-year university is a time of great stress for students

– Increased academic demands at four-year university

– Online universities require independence and self-directedness

Adult Student Population

• Older

• Non-residential

• Interrupted educational pathways

– Part-time

– Stop-out

– Mostly transfer

• Lower income

• Minority

Kresge Research Project

Improve transfer student success

• Collaborate with community colleges

• Build an integrated database

• Conduct data mining

• Predict transfer success at the four-year

• Identify factors associated with success

• Implement interventions

Focus of Kresge Research

Community College

Data

Institutional Profiles

University of Maryland University College (UMUC)

• Large, open-access, online university serving adult working students with families

Maryland community colleges:

Montgomery College

Prince George’s Community College

• Large, diverse institutions with lower-income students who have little or no online experience.

• Provides the largest number of transfer students to UMUC

Academic Trajectories for Transfer Students

Community College

Data

UMUC First

Term GPA Retention Graduation

Re-enrollment

Objective

To support community college

transfer students to achieve success

in their first semester at a four-year,

Literature Insights

– “Eco-shock”

– Challenges navigating new environment

– Challenges with academic and social integration

– Inadequate information about the transfer institution

• Transfer students need three types of resources: – Institutional resources (Formal)

– Peer support (Informal)

– Independent self-support (Initiative-based)

• Support for the specific interventions we developed

– Students’ desire for a checklist

Stakeholder Insights

• Community College partner insights:

– Students need role models

• Having a mentor who was like them. – Institution should provide social support

• UMUC insights:

– Review of previous interventions

• Advising insight:

Drivers for the Interventions

Interventions

College Success Mentoring Student Resource

Key Outcomes

•

First-term GPA

•

Successful Course Completion:

percent

of courses completed with grade C or

above

•

Re-enrollment:

enrollment in semester

following the first semester of transfer

•

Student perceptions:

satisfaction survey

results from students

Checklist Description

• Students are asked to identify academic

and social resources

– Learners are active in finding university resources

– Practice navigating online support services

• Targeted areas:

– Academic planning (e.g., identify school calendar)

– Institutional navigation (e.g., access student account)

– Social orientation (e.g., communicate with advisor)

Checklist Population

• Checklist intervention targeted all new

community college transfer students

– N=343

• Students randomly assigned to test and

control groups

– Test group: n=240

Checklist Implementation

• Checklist was available online or as a Word

form

– Advisors disseminated checklist to students – Follow up phone calls

• 59 students completed the checklist

Checklist Performance Results

Key Outcomes Test (n=240) Control (n=103) Term GPA 2.65 2.68 Successful Course Completion 0.78 0.82

No significant differences in GPA or rate of successful course completion

Key Outcomes Checklist Completers (n=59) Control (n=103) Term GPA 2.93 2.68 Successful Course Completion 0.81 0.82

Checklist Survey

• All students (test and control) received

the survey (N=343)

– Completed the checklist: 25/240

– Did not complete the checklist: 4/103

• 29 students completed the satisfaction

survey

– 8.4% response rate for all (N=343) students

Checklist Survey Results

• 85% of students would recommend the

checklist to other students

• Comments:

– “It helped me compile information and learn

how to use UMUC's website.”

– “I had all my instructors emails listed on one

sheet”

– “It helped me get back into school after

being out for 6 years.”

College Success Mentoring

Program

Mentor Selection

• Criteria for mentor invitation:

– Enrolled at UMUC in Spring 2014 – Enrolled at UMUC for at least 1 year – GPA: 3.0 or above

– N=841 students received mentor invitation

• Mentor Orientation (7 day training):

– Mentor handbook

– Seven discussion topics

– Communication to mentees

Mentee Selection

• New community college transfer students

in Spring 2014

• Random assignment to test and control

groups

– Test group: 90

– Control group: 34

• Mentor-mentee matching criteria

– Community College of origin – Major

Mentoring Intervention

• Eight topics for 8 weeks of classes:

– Setting goals

– Time management

– Class participation and communicating with instructors

– Study skills and managing workload – Academic support at UMUC

– Maintaining motivation

– Self-assessment and long-term goal setting

Mentee Performance Results

Key Outcomes Test

(n=90) Control (n=34) Term GPA 2.53 2.54 Successful Course Completion 0.74 0.73

No significant differences in GPA and rate of successful course completion were identified.

Mentee Survey Feedback

• 20% response rate

• 82% would recommend this program

• Comments:

– “Having someone that went through the same process help[ed] me get one step closer to my goal.”

– Academic: “They had previous experience with the format of UMUC classes; gave insight to how they would be like.”

– Social: “She is very caring and very down to earth. She made it very easy to communicate with her.”

– UMUC Specific: “He helped the most in getting

accustomed to the 8 week sessions and how to set up my schedule throughout the week to be successful.”

Mentor Performance Results

Key Outcomes Test

(n=70) Control (n=116) Cumulative GPA 3.56* 3.36* Term GPA 3.40 3.20 Successful Course Completion 0.95* 0.90*

Significant differences were found between mentors (test) and non-mentors (control) for cumulative GPA and

Mentor Survey Feedback

• 48% response rate • Comments:

– Role Modeling: “It puts me in a responsible position. Not only did I have to help [him] succeed, I have to [prove] to him that what I'm teaching him is working by passing myself.”

– Motivation: “I like the idea of helping others. College is not always easy and the idea and act of helping others is highly motivating.”

– Institutional Connection: “Having the opportunity to give back to UMUC and have others learn from my experiences.”

– Leadership: “What I found to be most valuable is my ability to learn more about myself as a leader and being able to improve my communication skills”

Conclusions

• No significant effects were found for

either intervention

– First iteration of the intervention – First semester intervention

• May have long-term impact on

re-enrollment and retention

Indirect Benefits

• A challenge for online institutions is creating a social community for students

– Interventions provide a way to interact with other students

– Interventions provide an opportunity to connect with the university

• Checklist

– Students learn about institutional resources – Learning by doing (self-discovery)

– Students feel cared for and supported by the university

• Mentoring

– Students feel cared for and supported by the university – Serendipitous benefits for mentors

• Mentors perform better than non-mentors

Lessons Learned

• Integrate interventions to offer a holistic

approach to student success

• Collaborate with cross-institutional

stakeholders

• Evaluate interventions to determine their

effectiveness using measurable outcomes

• Lather, rinse, repeat – modify interventions

based on evaluation and feedback

Next Steps

• Women’s Mentoring/Boys to Men

• Diverse Male Student Initiative

• Development Education (math modules)

• JumpStart Summer

Thank you!

Alexandra List

(alexandra.list@umuc.edu) Denise Nadasen