1.7.king,jones

• 1. Accelerating the Path to Degree Completion and Increasing Retention through STEMScholars Step-Up Bridge Program AFACCT 22nd Annual Conference January 5, 2012Session 1.7Supawan King, Ph.D., Associate Professor of MathChris Jones, Assistant Professor of MathHarford Community College

2. Presentation Overview STEM Scholar Step-Up Bridge Program Mathematics Curriculum Tracking of Students Student Feedback & Next Steps Questions2 AFACCT, January 5, 2012 3. STEM Scholar Step-Up Bridge Program STEM Programs at HCC STEM Scholar Step-Up Bridge program andCurriculum Design Selection of population Anticipated Outcomes3AFACCT, January 5, 2012 4. HCC STEM Programs HCC STEM Programs Math, Biology, Chemistry, Engineering,Environmental Science, Engineering Technology,CADD, Biotechnology Fall 2011 majors: Engineering: 181; Biology 141;Engineering Technology: 61; Chemistry: 46 Strong STEM focus regionally and nationally Concerns: looming workforce shortages in STEMfields combined with declining student interestand readiness for STEM fields4AFACCT, January 5, 2012 5. HCC STEM Vision/GoalsHCC STEM Vision/Goals Meet regional needs for a prepared STEM workforce by: Increasing number of students pursuing STEMdegrees Ensuring students are prepared to be successful Supporting degree completion5 AFACCT, January 5, 2012 6. STEM Bridge Program Design STEM Bridge Program Design First year design: 3 weeks, five days per week, 8 hour days Fully integrated program Developed career awareness and strengthened skillsin English, math, research, and academic skills Daily, each morning: math and English; afternoons:science, labs Daily lunch conversations with scientists andengineerings6 AFACCT, January 5, 2012 7. Program DesignProgram Design Second year program design: Two tracks, Engineering and Science Enrolled higher numbers of engineering majors Daily lunches with guest speakers very popular Third year program design: Increased focus on engineering; majority ofstudents enrolled were engineering majors Four weeks, three days per week Increased math content, integratedEnglish/research into science/engineering content7 AFACCT, January 5, 2012 8. Selection of Population Selection of Population Mailed letters to homes; well publicized; workedwith advising; sent brochures to high schools First year: targeted incoming STEM majors whotested just at or below college level math Second and third year: targeted all incomingSTEM majors, since focus included engineeringmajors who need to be calculus ready in firstsemester8AFACCT, January 5, 2012 9. Anticipated Outcomes Anticipated Outcomes Retain students in STEM majors through degree completion by: Shortening time to degree completion by advancingplacements in math Connecting students to each other, to resources, tothe STEM community Strengthening academic skills Increasing knowledge of various STEM careers9AFACCT, January 5, 2012 10. Mathematics Curriculum Mathematics Curriculum Development Pre-Assessment Daily Lectures & MyMathTest Post-Assessment Math Placement Over-expectation of students math skill Curriculum Redesign Algebra Track Function Track10 AFACCT, January 5, 2012 11. Math Curriculum RedesignMath 002 Intro to AlgebraMath 017Intermediate AlgebraAlgebraAlgebra Post- TrackAssessmentMath 101 College AlgebraPre-Math 103 Assessment Trigonometry Math 109Pre-CalculusFunction Function Post- TrackAssessmentMath 203Calculus I11AFACCT, January 5, 2012 12. 12 AFACCT, January 5, 2012 13. Tracking of Students Population: Bridge Students Summer 2009: n = 20 (F=3, M=17, HS=1) Summer 2010: n = 19 (F=6, M=14, HS=2) Data collected from Fall 2009 to Spring 2011 Student Performance Student Success: Retention, Completion, and Transfer Reduction in Time to Completion13 AFACCT, January 5, 2012 14. Student Performance4.0 3.89 GPA by Degree(Spring 2011, n = 36, College Average = 2.85) 3.213.25 3.16 3.033.00 3.02 2.97 2.89 2.902.933.0 2.86 2.74 2.822.74 2.80 2.772.722.662.70 2.562.46 2.40 2.272.01.00.014Bridge STEM AFACCT, January 5, 2012 15. Student Performance GPA(Spring 2011, n = 36, , College Average = 2.85) 3.5 2.99 3.02.902.882.71 2.71 2.64 2.5 2.0 Sci, Engr, & MathTechnology Non STEMBridge Overall AFACCT, January 5, 201215 16. Student Success - PerformanceOf 39 Bridge studentsSTEM Bridge Students Overall (2009-2010, n = 39) 15.8% initially success 66% success 14 13 11% fail, and 12 12 Initiallly Success 8% withdraw 10 Success 8 Fail 6 Withdraw from the 4 program 4322 2 21 0 2009 201016AFACCT, January 5, 2012 17. Student Success in Math - Performance 80% of successful Bridge students passed subsequentMath courses Student Success overall by Degree Student Success in Math by Degree (2009-2010, n = 36)(2009-2010, n = 31) 100% 2 Non STEM 90% 10% 80% 2Technology 1 10% 70% 60%22 50% FailSci, Engr, & 40% 2 Math 30% Success80% 1 20% 10% 5 1 Initial 0%SuccessSci, Engr, & Technology Non STEM Math17AFACCT, January 5, 2012 18. Success of Math Intervention > 80% of Bridge students Student Success in Math Requirements are successful in Math 100% courses90% 88.2%85.7%83.3%80% 72.8%72.7%72.8% 94% of Bridge students70% with no change in their60% initial Math placement are successful 50%40% 80% of Bridge students30% placed one or two20% levels up in Math courses10% are successful0%2009 2010 Overall Bridge StudentsSTEM Students18 AFACCT, January 5, 2012 19. Student Success after BridgePlacementSuccess in Math Courses after Bridge Placement (n = 36) 100% 1 90% 31 80% 70% 60% 50% 16 Fail 40% 11 4 Success 30% 20% 10%0%No Change1-level up 2-level up19AFACCT, January 5, 2012 20. Student Success after BridgePlacement No Change in Math Placement 1-Level up of Math Placement (n = 17) (n = 14)12 106 5 5 55109 584634 33 22112 1100Trans 100 Level 200 LevelTrans100 Level 200 Level2-Level up of Math Placement(n = 5)4 3322SM 1 SM&S10020Trans100 LevelAFACCT, January 5, 2012 21. Student Success after Bridge Placement Transitional Level Initial Math 100 Level Initial Math PlacementPlacement (n = 16)(n = 10) 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 433 3 3 3 22 2 2 1 1 1 10 0 0 No Change1-level up 2-level up No Change1-level up2-level up 200 Level Initial Math Placement(n = 11) 1210 10986 Math4 Math & Overall21 1210AFACCT, January 5, 2012 No Change1-level up 22. Student Success after BridgePlacementSuccess in Math & Overall(n=31) 100.0% 100% 90% 80.6% 80% 75.0% 70% 60%50.0% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10%0%No Change 1-level up2-level upOverall22 AFACCT, January 5, 2012 23. Student Success after Bridge Placement (Summary) Program Population 2009-2010(n =36 + 3 withdrew)with no change in Success Overall (31) 92.3%33.3%Math Placement (12)with 1-level up in Math Success in Math (25) 69.4%30.6%Placement (11) Success Overall &with 2-level up in80.6% 5.6% Math (25/31) Math Placement (2)23AFACCT, January 5, 2012 24. Bridge Student StatusStudent Status as of Fall 2011(n = 39) Withdrew No Record8%10% Graduate 5% Transfer Current 18%59%24 AFACCT, January 5, 2012 25. Summary The STEM Scholars Bridge program is successful in: Closing gaps in content knowledge Preparing students with college-ready skills Reducing time to completion25 AFACCT, January 5, 2012 26. Student Feedback &Next Steps26AFACCT, January 5, 2012 27. Contact STEM Division: [email protected] Deborah Wrobel, Dean of STEM (443) 412-2240 [email protected] Supawan King, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Math (443) 412-2601 [email protected] Chris Jones, Assistant Professor of Math (443) 412-2055 [email protected], January 5, 2012