Improving Student Learning Outcomes in Gateway Courses

1
Improving Student Learning Outcomes in Gateway
Courses

• Methodology and Implementation Plans

2
Step 1

• Identify the gateway knowledge, skills and
  abilities learning outcomes by faculty The
  Gateway Initiative coordinator will work with
  faculty in the college level programs to identify
  important fundamental knowledge, skills and
  abilities important to continued student success
  in the programs that should be learned in
  introductory or gateway courses.

3
Step 2

• Mapping the identified knowledge, skills, and
  abilities outcomes to specific program courses
  Faculty Clusters will take the list of identified
  knowledge, skills and abilities in step one and
  then identify the courses where they should are
  introduced, emphasized, reviewed, and utilized.

4
Step 3

• Selecting Courses The Gateway Initiative
  coordinator and the Gateway Initiative Team will
  select specific courses for learning outcome
  improvement.

5
Gateway Courses

• Criteria For Selection

6
Consideration will be given to -

• Whether a given course is a pre-requisite to
  other courses or a core requirement for programs
• The number of students enrolled in a given course
  and to the number of sections scheduled during
  the Fall and Spring Terms
• The average section size

7
Consideration will be given to -

• The actual number of KSA's introduced or
  emphasized in a given course
• College-level courses that serve both AA and AS
  programs
• Courses that allow for methods of subsequent
  assessment, though the lack of actual sequenced
  follow-up courses should not prohibit a course
  from selection

8
Consideration will be given to -

• Course performance data such as course G.P.A. or
  course withdrawal rates
• Utilization of KSA's in relation to the courses
  where those utilized KSA's are introduced or
  emphasized
• KSA Knowledge, Skills and Abilities Items
  Identified in Curriculum Map

9
Consideration will be given to -

• The relationship of courses to SUS programs that
  students transfer into (although this might not
  relate to certain AAS or AS programs with limited
  or no transfers)
• And, courses chosen for the gateway initiative
  are not the focus of other initiatives for
  improving student performance.

10
Pilot Gateway Courses

• Criteria for selection were utilized to select
  the following as HCCs pilot Gateway Courses
• College Algebra Mac 1105
• General Psychology PSY 2012

11
Program Impact

• MAC 1105 - 54 AAS programs and 43 AS programs
•  
• PSY 2012 - 54 AAS programs and 46 AS programs
• Both courses serve to fulfill General Education
  requirements for the AA program

12
Enrollment

• PSY 2012
• Fall 2004 1999 enrolled - 60 sections
• Spring 2005 1808 enrolled 56 sections
• MAC 1105
• Fall 2004 1776 enrolled 59 sections
• Spring 2005 1786 enrolled 62 sections

13
Average Section Size

• PSY 2012 average section size for the 2004
  reporting year 32 students
• MAC 1105 average section size for the 2004
  reporting year 30 students

14
Enrollment

• PSY 2012 had the fourth highest enrollment for
  HCC classes during the 2004 reporting year.
• MAC 1105 had the sixth highest enrollment for HCC
  classes during the 2004 reporting year.

15
MAC 1105

• Fall 2004
• Course GPA 2.3
• of ABC grades 60.5
• 7.1 Ds, 5.1 FXs, and 10.1 Fs
• 17.2 Withdrawals

16
PSY 2012

• Fall 2004
• Course GPA 2.4
• of ABC grades 66.6
• 8 Ds, 4.8 FXs, and 9.9 Fs
• 10.7 Withdrawals

17
Level

• Both courses are college-level courses, and both
  fulfill program requirements for the AA program
  and a number of AS and AAS programs.

18
KSAs

• MAC 1105 28 KSAs
• PSY 2012 - 26 KSAs
• Faculty listed a total of 127 KSAs in the
  curriulum map.

19
Assessment

• Though neither course has a direct sequenced
  follow-up course, KSAs from both courses can be
  assessed in later program courses.

20
SUS Programs

• Business Management, Education, Engineering,
  Social Sciences, and Psychology programs are
  among the top 6 receiving programs at USF for HCC
  transfers and graduates all require MAC 1105 or
  PSY 2012 or both.

21
Other Initiatives

• At this time, neither course is the focus of
  another student success initiative at HCC.

22
Methodology Step 4

• Faculty will develop student learning outcomes
  from the identified KSAs and course objectives.
  These outcomes will become the focus for improved
  student learning.

23
Step 5

• Selecting Lead Faculty- The Gateway Initiative
  coordinator and the team will select a lead
  faculty member from those who regularly teach the
  course to help facilitate the planning process,
  including course evaluation and strategy
  experiment procedures.

24
Step 6

• The Gateway Initiative coordinator and the lead
  faculty member will coordinate the gateway course
  evaluation following the specific Gateway Course
  Evaluation Procedure.

25
(No Transcript)
26
Course Evaluation Process

• The Gateway Initiative coordinator and course
  lead faculty member will work with the Academic
  Assessment Specialist to analyze course
  performance data, segmented by campus, term, and
  faculty type, with background information on at
  least one or two sections as cohorts (placement
  testing information, prerequisite information,
  and subsequent course performance information on
  the cohort students)

27
Course Evaluation Process

• The Academic Assessment Specialist will work with
  cluster members to establish baseline assessments
  of the identified student learning outcomes.

28
Course Evaluation Process

• The Gateway Initiative coordinator will conduct
  focus groups and utilize questionnaires to
  solicit information from faculty and students
  about what course skills and knowledge are of
  greatest importance as the students progress
  through the programs. This information will be
  correlated with the previously identified gateway
  knowledge, skills and abilities.

29
Course Evaluation Process

• Working with cluster faculty, the coordinator
  will determine minimal outcome performance levels
  for continued program success and will identify
  missing foundation outcomes. The coordinator and
  lead faculty member will identify foundation
  outcomes where students are encountering problems
  with mastery. They will prioritize, if possible,
  these foundation outcomes.

30
Course Evaluation Process

• Working with the appropriate faculty cluster, the
  coordinator will examine prerequisites both in
  terms of prerequisite course work and in terms of
  actual prerequisite abilities.

31
Course Evaluation Process

• The coordinator will examine the course delivery
  methods considering non-traditional delivery
  methods such as online sections. If only
  traditional delivery methods are used, the
  coordinator will analyze the appropriateness of
  adding additional delivery methods and make
  appropriate recommendations to the faculty
  cluster.

32
Course Evaluation Process

• The coordinator and lead faculty member will
  inventory existing teaching and learning
  strategies being utilized by cluster faculty
  teaching the course.

33
Course Evaluation Process

• Working with the Library Cluster, the coordinator
  and lead faculty member will conduct literature
  review and idea shopping for appropriate teaching
  and learning strategies for these outcomes. They
  will then recommend to the appropriate teaching
  faculty cluster specific strategies and student
  resources for improving identified student
  learning outcomes.

34
Course Evaluation Process

• The Gateway Initiative coordinator and lead
  faculty member will prepare the experimental
  procedures for the directed strategies for
  improvement, following the Gateway Initiative
  Experimental Model.

35
Methodology Step 7

• Recommending Strategies - The Gateway Initiative
  coordinator and lead faculty member will
  recommend specific strategies to improve outcomes
  within course to the appropriate cluster.

36
Step 8

• Designing the Gateway Course Webpage - The
  Gateway Initiative coordinator will develop the
  Gateway Course Webpage with input from the
  teaching faculty.

37
Step 9

• Developing the Experiment - The Gateway
  Initiative coordinator along with the lead
  faculty member will develop the strategies
  experiment process specific to the course, but
  following the Gateway Course Experiment Model.

38
Experimental Model

• Identify the specific strategy for improvement
  and identify the specified teaching and learning
  outcomes to be affected by the strategy.

39
Experimental Model

• Develop the Hypothesis what is the expectation
  for the identified strategy?

40
Experimental Model

• Provide a detailed explanation of the methodology
  for implementing the strategy.

41
Experimental Model

• Develop common assessment instruments for the
  expected affected outcomes, to be utilized in
  both the experimental sections and control
  sections.

42
Experimental Model

• Identify faculty and sections for the experiment
  coordinate with campus deans
• First year sections will only deal with one
  strategy at a time
• Second year sections will combine strategies.

43
Experimental Model

• Utilize control sections, administering the same
  assessment instruments as used in the experiment
  sections during both terms of the experiment.

44
Experimental Model

• Explain analysis of assessment process.
• Proceed with experiment.

45
Methodology Step 10

• Implementing Student Resources - Following the
  planning term, the college will implement
  recommended additional student resources
  appropriate to the course all such resources
  will be listed on the Gateway Course Webpage or
  linked to the page if they are online resources.

46
Step 11

• Assessing the Experiment - The Academic
  Assessment Specialist will work with the Gateway
  Initiative coordinator at the end of the term to
  provide analysis of the classroom strategies
  experiments and of the usage and impact of
  additional student resources.

47
Step 12

• Analyzing the Results - Following the initial
  experiment term, combined strategies experiment
  sections and control sections will be conducted
  and analyzed for effectiveness

48
Finally

• Implementing the Gateway Course, utilizing the
  effective learning strategies.

49
(No Transcript)
50
Schedule

• 2004-2006
• Developing the QEP
• Identifying KSAs
• Curriculum mapping
• Selecting two pilot courses
• Developing Learning outcomes
• Selecting Lead Faculty members
• Baseline assessments

51
Proposed Schedule 2006 2007 Sp 2007 Sum 2007 Fall 2008 Sp 2008 Sum 2008 Fall
Course Evaluation Set 1 Set 2
Course Selection Set 2 Set 3
Develop Learning Outcomes Set 1 Set 2 Set 3
Plan experimental models Set 1 Set 2
Baseline assessment Set 1 Set 2 Set 2 Set 3 Set 3
Experimental sections Set1 Set 1 Set 2
Experimental Analysis Set 1
52
Proposed Schedule

• During the following fall term, the experimental
  model begins, with 4 terms of experimentation,
  (fall and spring terms only). Analysis of
  experiment results will take place during the
  summer terms.

53
Proposed Schedule

• Courses are selected in the spring terms.
  Initial student learning outcomes are developed
  that term.
• Baseline assessments takes place the following
  summer and fall terms.
• During the second spring term for a course, the
  course evaluation and experimental planning
  begin.

54
Proposed Schedule

• Following two years of experiment and analysis,
  final recommendations for improving student
  learning outcomes will be made.
• Follow-up assessments in later program courses
  will continue until the completion of the QEP in
  Spring Term 2012.

55
Proposed Schedule Example

• MAC 1105 and PSY 2012
• Spring 2006 selected, student learning outcomes
  developed
• Summer and Fall 2006 baseline assessment, lead
  faculty members selected
• Spring and Summer 2007 course evaluation and
  experimental planning

56
Proposed Schedule Example

• Fall 2007 and Spring 2008 experimental sections
  dedicated to one strategy
• Summer 2008 analysis and planning
• Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 combined experimental
  sections
• Summer 2009 analysis and recommendations
• Fall 2009 Spring 2011 follow-up assessments

57
Final Report

• The Final Report on the status and success of the
  QEP will be due to SACS in the Summer Term of
  2012.