Print

Print


Sara,
Your response is exactly what I seem to be dealing with regarding our SI
program. Might you be willing to share your interpretive report...off of
the list serve? I would love to begin showing our data to critics in a more
comprehensive way.

Most fondly
Marisa Passafiume


 -----------------------

*Marisa Passafiume*
*Director, Center for Academic Success*
*Tutor Trainer, National Tutoring Association*

Riverdale, NY 10471
Phone: 718-862-7796
Fax: 718-862-7791
[log in to unmask]
www.manhattan.edu


On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Sara Weertz <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Ah, I love this question...one I think I can answer because this used to
> be a typical response to Supplemental Instruction (SI) which has a history
> of empirical evidence indicating that students who use SI on a regular
> basis get better grades. Faculty often opine that SI students would have
> gotten successful grades no matter what; they argue that SI students (or
> those who self-select) are already the "good" students.   Faculty continued
> their criticism of the numbers even after I added qualitative
> data--feedback from the students themselves, in their own words, saying
> they excelled in their coursework because of SI.
>
> It was, however, more difficult to be critical of my interpretive report,
> which pulls the following data on students enrolled in SI-supported classes:
>
> * GPA (at the beginning of the term)
> * ACT/SAT scores
> * Classification
> * Ethnicity
> * Residency (on/off campus)
> * Major/Minor
> * Academic Standing
> * Cohort attributes such as athletics, provisional status, international
> student, etc.
>
> If I run the interpretive reports at the beginning of the term, I get a
> bird's-eye view of the class, which allows me to also create individual
> student profiles.
>
> The beauty of the interpretive report is its use as a tool to make
> predictions about the students in our SI-supported classes. An example
> would be to examine how a freshman with several at-risk factors and low ACT
> scores (which tests science acumen) might fare in a traditionally difficult
> biology class. Since our SI support focuses on traditionally difficult
> classes where many students struggle, we then make predictions on success
> (A, B, or C) depending on whether the less proficient students and those
> considered at-risk attend SI, how often they attend, and when they attend.
> The interpretive report allows us to compile some fascinating reports for
> variety of departments and student services. Our measurements consistently
> show that no matter how many at-risk factors a student may have, the more
> SI visits, the higher the final grade.
>
> While something like an interpretive report is more difficult to generate
> with tutoring, it can be done.
>
> sal
>
>
> Sara Weertz, M.Ed.
> Executive Director, First Year Experience
> ASU Station #10915
> Angelo State University
> San Angelo, TX  76909
> (325) 942-2595
> [log in to unmask]
>
> CRLA President-Elect 2013-2014
> www.crla.net
>
> ****************************************************
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Open Forum for Learning Assistance Professionals [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Marcia Toms
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2014 8:32 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: ROI on Academic Support Services? -- Different Take
>
> That is great, Leonard.
>
> One question, though: Do students voluntarily come to your center?  If so,
> how do you address the motivation issue?  In other words, who is to say
> that these students wouldn't have higher retention rates anyway?
>
> Best,
> -Marcia
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Roberta Schotka <[log in to unmask]
> >wrote:
>
> > Leonard,
> >
> > That is brilliant, especially since it is so difficult to link grades
> > directly to tutoring, given all of the other contributing factors.
> >
> > -Roberta
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Geddes, Leonard G.
> > <[log in to unmask]
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Melissa and any others who are interested,
> > >
> > > I have attached part of a report that I sent up to the "powers  that
> be"
> > > about the influence our services are having on the bottom line --
> > > retention. In the past, we communicated how we were affecting
> > > academic performance.  However, when it seemed like reporting how
> > > students were improving academically was not generating the traction
> > > that we thought it deserved, I decided to speak the administration's
> > > language by adding a retention element to the report.  In short, we
> > > compared the re-enrollment rates of students using our services to
> > > general student retention,
> > athletic
> > > teams, etc.  Our numbers rocked!  (I've attached an abbreviated
> > > report since I don't think the administration would like us to share
> > > financial info publically.)
> > >
> > > In the actual report, we put figures to the report by factoring in
> > > the "real" revenue that is generated per student. For example,
> > hypothetically,
> > > if the overall retention rate was 70%, but our numbers were 86%,
> > > then we showed numerically how much revenue 16% more students added
> > > to the bottom line, thus showing that we are revenue generating.
> > >
> > > As a result of changing to reporting this way, our reports have been
> > going
> > > all the way up the chain to the Board.  Recently, they specifically
> > > referenced our center and services in the new strategic plan!  We
> > > are now preparing for a significant budget increase as well -- yay!
> > >
> > > I hope this is useful.
> > >
> > > Leonard Geddes
> > > Associate Dean of Co-Curricular Programs Director of the Learning
> > > Commons Division of Student Life Lenoir-Rhyne University www.lr.edu
> > > [log in to unmask]
> > > (828) 328-7024
> > > (828) 328-7702 (fax)
> > >
> > > The LearnWell Projects Blog:
> > http://www.thelearnwellprojects.com/thewell/
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > To access the LRNASST-L archives or User Guide, or to change your
> > subscription options (including subscribe/unsubscribe), point your web
> > browser to http://www.lists.ufl.edu/archives/lrnasst-l.html
> >
> > To contact the LRNASST-L owner, email [log in to unmask]
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Marcia Toms, Ph.D.
> Associate Director
> Undergraduate Tutorial Center
> Division of Academic and Student Affairs North Carolina State University
> Campus Box 7118 / 101 Park Shops Raleigh, NC 27695-7118
> 919.513.7829
> http://www.ncsu.edu/tutorial_center/
>
> Public Record Reminder: All electronic mail messages in connection with
> State business that are sent to or received by this account are subject to
> the NC Public Records Law.  They are retained and may be disclosed to third
> parties.
>
> Confidentiality: Nothing in the NC Public Records Law diminishes the
> privacy protections afforded by federal law (e.g., FERPA, HIPAA, etc.)
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> To access the LRNASST-L archives or User Guide, or to change your
> subscription options (including subscribe/unsubscribe), point your web
> browser to http://www.lists.ufl.edu/archives/lrnasst-l.html
>
> To contact the LRNASST-L owner, email [log in to unmask]
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> To access the LRNASST-L archives or User Guide, or to change your
> subscription options (including subscribe/unsubscribe), point your web
> browser to
> http://www.lists.ufl.edu/archives/lrnasst-l.html
>
> To contact the LRNASST-L owner, email [log in to unmask]
>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To access the LRNASST-L archives or User Guide, or to change your
subscription options (including subscribe/unsubscribe), point your web browser to
http://www.lists.ufl.edu/archives/lrnasst-l.html

To contact the LRNASST-L owner, email [log in to unmask]