Print

Print


Dennis H. Congos wrote:

> Craig Andres,
>
> For the specific kind of data you want on 4 year
> private schools on the quarter system, I suggest
>
> you contact David Arendale, Co-Director for SI
> Dissemination at the University of Missouri at
> Kansas City.  His email address is
> [log in to unmask]  His phone number is
> 816-235-1197.

Thank you!

>
>
> You said:
> The numbers I reported were straight from UMKC.
> My main concern is that their numbers seem
> to indicate that their system will not make much
> difference in our programs.
>
> My reply:
> What we don't have from UMKC's numbers is
> information on incoming variables.  I see that
> as a
> weakness in the research but when incoming
> variables have been correctly accounted for, SI
> is
> very cost effective and retention effective and
> academically effective.
>

I am assuming that UMKC's numbers are pictured
under the best light.

> You said:
> We do not currently have SI, and I will not
> endorse it to my superiors if I feel that the
> cost will be
> more than the returns.  This program would be
> very expensive for us to run, anywhere
> from 20K to 50K a year to start.
>
> My reply:
> Why in the world would SI take 20K to 50K to
> start?  That is not true.  BUT IF SI did cost
> $50K
> to run, how may students would SI have to
> persuade to remain at your institution to be
> cost
> effective?  At an institution where I was SI
> Supervisor recently, we broke even at 10
> students
> retained out of about 1000 students per year who
> attended SI.  Tuition was about $5000 per
> year. SI was very cost effective here and even
> made money for the school in retained income.
> Longitudinal research on SI shows that about 10%
> more of SI attendees graduate than non-SI
> attendees.  That means there are 10% more
> students in the academic pipeline each year
> until
> graduation.  For most schools that amounts to a
> lot of retained income.  At the institution I
> mentioned above, 10% of 1000 students is about
> 100.  If 100 students are retained each year as
> research suggests, that converts into about
> $500,000 in retained income each year until
> graduation.  I think that is pretty cost
> effective.
>

I meant for the first year, since a budget has to
be allocated at the beginning of a fiscal year.
We have four semesters, non-stop education, so at
only 20K that would be 5K per semester.  That has
to include training, and it assumes that I could
recruit my best tutors to be facilitators, and
then recruit more new tutors to replace the
others.  Instead, I would have to hire
professionals to facilitate the workshops, and
they cost more.  Coordinating, training, and I
probably would do some of the workshops myself
would cause me to take time away from my other
duties, unless we hire someone to do these
things$$$.  My own position is less than a year
old.  It almost didn't happen.  Now I found out
that I need to start coming up with statistics to
prove that my tutoring program, and the Academic
Support Center I created are effective at
retention.

> You said:
> It would also take me away from what I do best,
> tutoring.  Our students have a higher than
> average workload, 19-21 credits in a 12 week
> semester.  Time management is critical, and I
> fear these workshops may have some negative
> effects.  I absolutely believe that the model
> works
> at many other colleges, but I want more data
> specifically on 4 year private schools that use
> a
> quarter system.
>
> My reply:
> SI puts you right in the middle of the elements
> that make tutoring work.  One thing SI is is
> very
> time efficient.  Instead on one tutor reaching 3
> to 5 students per day in 3 to 5 sessions at $$$
> per session, SI leaders can reach many more than
> that in one session.
>

I feel that our tutoring program is very
effective.  We do drop in tutoring for a set
schedule.  The students are very supportive, Our
cost for tutoring is about 5$ per contact hour
with students.  I do not have the pool of students
necessary to make SI that cost effective.  We are
a Coop college, which means that two of the three
best reasons for being a tutor are nullified (As a
resume builder tutoring is not much compared to
their real world experience.  Most of our students
make enough money with their Coop employer.)  Plus
I rarely have a tutor that can work more than
10hrs per week.  Which all means that I probably
would have to hire some professionals.

> I understand your concern about not establishing
> a program until you are convinced it will work
> and be cost effective.  I suggest you attend an
> SI training session at UMKC and find out the
> details on how to set up an SI program and its
> true costs.  Your opinion of SI may change when
> you get the full story.
>

I would like to, but it isn't a likely event. I
haven't completely and efficiently expressed my
situation and concerns, but I think most of it is
there.  It is just me here by the way, I have no
secretarty, I just got a temporary office and a
decent computer.  Plus I have about four other
things going on right now.  So for me SI is just a
consideration at this point.  That is why this
forum is so wonderful, that I can pick peoples
brains while getting some things off my chest.
This has been very helpful.

> Thank you for the opportunity to discuss SI,
> Craig.  I am interested in your thoughts on my
> treatise above......and from other colleagues,
> also.
>
> Dennis Congos
>

Thank you!!!

--
Craig Andres
Tutor Program Coordinator
Kettering University
(Continuing the GMI heritage)

"It doesn't matter if you try and try and try
again, and fail. It does
matter if you try and fail, and fail to try
again."