2006 Report

Key trends noted in this specific report:

Dynamic knowledge creation and social computing tools and processes are becoming more widespread and accepted.

Mobile and personal technology is increasingly being viewed as a delivery platform for services of all kinds.

Consumers are increasingly expecting individualized services, tools, and experiences, and open access to media, knowledge, information, and learning.

Collaboration is increasingly seen as critical across the range of educational activities, including intra- and inter-institutional activities of any size or scope.

Critical Challenges

Peer review and other academic processes, such as promotion and tenure reviews, increasingly do not reflect the ways scholarship actually is conducted.

Information literacy should not be considered a given, even among “net-gen” students.

Intellectual property concerns and the management of digital rights and assets continue to loom as largely unaddressed issues.

The typical approach of experimentally deploying new technologies on campuses does not include processes to quickly scale them up to broad usage when they work, and often creates its own obstacles to full deployment.

1 year or less

One Year of Less

2 years or less

2007 Horizon Report:

Trends:   The environment of higher education is changing rapidly. Costs are rising, budgets are shrinking, and the demand for new services is growing. Student enrollments are declining.

Increasing globalization is changing the way we work, collaborate, and communicate.

Information literacy increasingly should not be considered a given.

Academic review and faculty rewards are increasingly out of sync with new forms of scholarship.

The notions of collective intelligence and mass amateurization are pushing the boundaries of

scholarship.

Students’ views of what is and what is not technology are increasingly different from those of faculty.

Critical Challenges:

Assessment of new forms of work continues to present a challenge to educators and peer reviewers.

There are significant shifts taking place in scholarship, research, creative expression, and learning, and a profound need for leadership at the highest levels of the academy that can

see the opportunities in these shifts and carry them forward.

While progress is being made, issues of intellectual property and copyright continue to

affect how scholarly work is done.

There is a skills gap between understanding how to use tools for media creation and how to create meaningful content.

The renewed emphasis on collaborative learning is pushing the educational community to develop new forms of interaction and assessment.

Higher education is facing a growing expectation to deliver services, content and media to

mobile and personal devices.

One year or less:

Two to Three Years

In the following posting  I will define institutional effectiveness, identify college offices of institutional effectiveness so that they reports, processes and procedures can be reviewed, and finally identify some critical data and information that institutions should be  collecting and reviewing for retention planning.

Central Piedmont Community College is the first site that comes up on a google search for “college institutional effectiveness.”  This site provides a definition for institutional effectiveness, which they cited as from the Southern Association of Schools and Colleges as follows:

A set of ongoing and systematic, institutional processes and practices that include:

• planning
• the evaluation of programs and services (including administration and student services)
• the identification and measurement of outcomes across all institutional units (including learning and program outcomes in instructional programs), and
• the use of data and assessment results to inform decision-making (culture of evidence)

All of these activities are accomplished with the purpose of improving programs and services and increasing student success and institutional quality.

Institutional effectiveness for CPCC primarily consists of the following:

The institutional effectiveness plan at the College consists of four major areas:

1. Tracking progress on the strategic plan and strategic goals through an annual cycle of establishing unit level goals and action items.
2. Conducting program and unit reviews. Program reviews that measure program and learning outcomes are conducted on a five-year cycle as the average student at CPCC completes in four to six years. Program review is also used to assess additional skills of the general education/Core4 competencies. Administrative and students’ services units, being service-providing units, conduct their reviews on a three-year cycle. These units measure administrative outcomes. Program and unit reviews have been conducted on a continuous cycle since 1998, and most programs/units have completed the process two to three times. Each year, approximately 20-25 academic programs and 15-20 administrative/student services units go through the program/unit review process.
3. Collaborating with the General education committee which has responsibility for assessing college-level general education outcomes on an annual basis.
4. Reporting out on the college’s various surveys, assessments (qualitative and quantitative) and national projects and completion initiatives.

The Office of Institutional Effectiveness for Lynchburg College provides a student profile, which in summary provides information on;

Current semester headcount, full time equivalent, graduate, undergraduate enrollments, gender enrollments, race/ethnicity, full time/part time, and enrollment by state.

The Institutional Effectiveness Committee at Lynchburg College has also developed the 10 steps for institutional effectiveness document.  These 10 steps are:

1. Establish a written mission or purpose.

2. Write the expected outcomes or objectives based on mission.

3. Determine the achievement target or the criteria for success for each outcome

(objective).

4. Identify measures and measurement strategies for each outcome or objective. Multiple

measures are appropriate.

5. Collect data using the measures to assess student performance / unit performance.

6. Analyze the findings(assessment data) in reference to the established criteria for

success.

7. Discuss and share results with program/departmental members to interpret findings.

Summarize.Note strengths, challenges, and examples where improved results can be

tied to use of assessment data.

8. Create action plans to effect improvements.

9. Include resource needs from action plans in budgeting prioritization.

10. Implement action plans;repeat steps 5 – 10 annually,review steps 1 – 4 periodically.

The Lynchburg College website provides a link to the Virginia Assessment Group.    The Virginia Assessment Group stated purpose and mission is:

The Virginia Assessment Group (VAG) promotes quality higher education through assessment and institutional effectiveness practices in all Commonwealth, post-secondary institutions. VAG serves as a network for communication and collaboration among institutions of higher education, state and federal agencies, and accreditation bodies. VAG offers professional development opportunities and serves as a forum for the exchange of ideas.

Edmonds Community College has developed an Institutional Effectiveness Plan.  This is the SIMPLE Plan which they states stands for:  Strategic, Informed, Measurable Process Leading to Effectiveness. As they state institutional effectiveness is a self-assessment process, “it is the purpose of the plan to align assessment with aligns department, unit, and committee goals with the college’s mission statement, core themes, and key performance indicators it provides an ongoing assessment and review of student learning and services provided for students.”

Gadsden State College provides an overview of unit level to institutional level assessment plans.   The provide the following types of program level assessments:

• Embedded course assignments – a project completed at an advanced level can be

used to assess skills learned through the entire program.

• Field Experiences – internship, practicum, service-learning, etc., evaluated through

supervisors’ ratings of student performance can be powerful evidence of a

successful program.

• Portfolios – compilation of student work over time can be a clear demonstration of

student learning, although they can be complicated to assess.

• Rubrics, Checklists, Task sheets – in advanced level courses, completed rubrics can

be very useful evidence of student achievement in a program.

• Results of external licensure or certification exams.
• Embedded comprehensive exam questions.

The also identify the following list of common assessment tools:

Direct indicators

• pre-and post-testing;
• capstone courses;
• oral examinations;
• internships;
• portfolio assessments;
• evaluation of capstone projects;
• standardized national exams;
• locally developed tests;
• performance on licensure,
• certification or professional exams;
• juried reviews and performances.

Indirect indicators

• alumni, employer, student surveys;
• graduation rates;
• transfer studies;
• graduate follow-up studies;
• success of students in subsequent institutional settings;
• job placement data.

Ultimately, as Eastern Kentucky University states on their institutional effectiveness website..Institutional Effectiveness is about knowing and doing what it takes to ensure student success.

Dr. Robert Jones defined student retention as  the extent to which learners remain within a

higher education institution, and complete a program of study in a predetermined time-period.   He also identified the following:  The Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), for

example, uses two measures of retention:  “The first is the ‘completion rate’ – the proportion of starters in a year who continue their studies until they obtain their qualification, with no more

than one consecutive year out of higher education.

A more immediate measure of retention is the proportion of an institution’s intake

which is enrolled in higher education in the year following their first entry  to higher education. This is the ‘continuation rate’.” (NAO, 2007, p5)

He identified the following primary reasons for student withdrawal or lack of persistence:

In this synthesis we have identified the following reasons or factors for

review:

1. Preparation for higher education.

2. Institutional and course match.

3. Academic experience.

4. Social integration.

5. Financial issues.

6. Personal circumstances.

Based upon his review of the literature he recommended the following:

(NAO 2007) and have become more pro-active in supporting student  success (Dodgson and Bolam 2002). Based on a review of the literature Yorke and Longden (2008) suggest the following factors contribute to  good student retention:

• an institutional commitment to student learning, and hence to student engagement;

• proactive management of student transition;

• curriculum issues such as treating learning as an academic and social milieu; and choosing curricular structures that increase the chances of student success.

The Office of Institutional Research with Ohio University provides the following information for student retention:

• The overall first-year (freshman) retention rate
• When students most commonly leave their institution (first year students between the fall and spring semesters  and the spring and fall (quarter) of their sophomore year)
• Retention rate for certain racial/ethnic groups
• The first-year retention rate for first generation college students versus non first generation students.
• Retention rates for students by gender
• There is a positive relationship between students’ high school academic performance and
• retention and between ACT scores and retention.
• Retention rates by programs
• Large-enrollment first-year courses
• Surveys of non-returning students revealed that among non-academic reasons for leaving Ohio University, personal adjustment, financial reasons, and environmental reasons were reported  most frequently.

From their 2008 study Craig and Ward recommended:

• Promoting informational and assistance programs for high school students, especially to those most likely not to attend, concerning college admission and attendance.
• Developing identification systems and intervention strategies to aid academically challenged community college students as early as possible.
• Allocating sufficient resources to strengthen academic and career advising and counseling services for community college students, especially those at risk, and to begin counseling students prior to entry.
• Promulgating stricter policies on course withdrawals. This recommendation parallels one suggested by Adelman, “There are also aspects of postsecondary education that do not bode well for degree attainment. . . .
• No-penalty course withdrawals and no-credit course repeats are the ‘death knell’ that is within the power of the institutions to contain” (American Youth Policy Forum, 2006, ¶ 11).

Craig, A. J., & Cynthia V.L. Ward. (2008). Retention of community college students: Related student and institutional characteristics. Journal of College Student Retention, 9(4), 505-517. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/196731802?accountid=28844

In2004 the New Media Consortium started publishing the Horizon Reports.  The reports compiled the findings of what experts projected as emerging technologies in the field of education.    The 2004 report states specifically that;

The project draws on an ongoing series of interviews with scientists, engineers, technologists, and other knowledgeable individuals in business, industry, and education to identify potentially promising technologies, as well as published resources such as the Gartner Group’s Hype Cycles and other examinations of emerging technologies. The Horizon Project’s Advisory Board provided another perspective on the relative utility of each of the technologies identified.

The reports are structured and identify emerging trends or technology in education as follows:

The first assumes a high likelihood of broad adoption within the next year; the second, adoption within two to three years; and the third, adoption within four to five years.

Following I will provide an overview of each emerging trend or technology and information on the web that identifies the status of each today.

Identified one to two year horizon:

2

2-3 years

3-4 years

2005 Horizon Report

Blended Learning Infographic

One year or less

Extended Learning.	On some campuses,traditional instruction is augmented withtechnology tools that are familiar to studentsand used by them in daily life. Extended learning courses can be conceptualized as hybrid courses with an extended set of communication tools and strategies. The classroom serves as a home base for exploration, and integrates online instruction, traditional instruction, and study groups, all supported by a variety of communication tools.	Hybrid courses, blended learning, supplemental
Ubiquitous Wireless.	With new developmentsin wireless technology both in terms oftransmission and of devices that can connectto wireless networks, connectivity is increasingly available and desired. Campuses and even communities are beginning to regard universal wireless access as a necessity for all.	Decade in wireless	Wireless industry

2- 3 years out

Intelligent Searching.	To support people’s growing need to locate, organize, and retrieveinformation, sophisticated technologies forsearching and finding are becoming available.These agents range from personal desktopsearch “bots,” to custom tools that catalog and search collections at an individual campus, to specialized search interfaces like GoogleScholar.	How Search Works	Internet Search Engine History
Educational Gaming.	Taking a broad view ofeducational gaming, one finds that games arenot new to education. Technology and gamingcombine in interesting ways, not all of which areabout immersive environments or virtual reality.What is evolving is the way technology is appliedto gaming in education, with new combinationsof concepts and games appearing on the horizon.	Gamification in educationhttp://www.knewton.com/gamification-education/

3 or more

Social Networks and Knowledge Webs.	Supplying people’s need to connect with each other in meaningful ways, social networks and knowledge webs offer a means of facilitating teamwork and constructing knowledge. Theunderlying technologies fade into the background while collaboration and communication are paramount.	On the surface, social media and knowledge management (KM) seem very similar. Both involve people using technology to access information. Both require individuals to create information intended for sharing. Both profess to support collaboration.But there’s a big difference. Knowledge management is what company management tells me I need to know, based on what they think is important. Social media is how my peers show me what they think is important, based on their experience and in a way that I can judge for myself.	Social Media/Social Network InfographicWeb 2.0 and Social MediaKnowledge Management on the social Web
Context-Aware Computing/Augmented Reality.	These related technologies deal with computers that can interact with people in richer ways. Context-aware computing uses environmental conditions to customize the user’s experience or options. Augmented reality provides additional  contextual information that appears as part ofthe user’s world. Goals of both approaches are increased access and ease-of-use.	Augmented reality (AR) is a live, direct or indirect, view of a physical, real-world environment whose elements are augmented by computer-generated sensory input such as sound, video, graphics or GPSdata. It is related to a more general concept called mediated reality, in which a view of reality is modified (possibly even diminished rather than augmented) by a computer. As a result, the technology functions by enhancing one’s current perception of reality.[1] By contrast, virtual reality replaces the real world with a simulated one.[2][3] Augmentation is conventionally in real-time and in semantic context with environmental elements, such as sports scores on TV during a match. With the help of advanced AR technology (e.g. adding computer vision and object recognition) the information about the surrounding real world of the user becomes interactive and (can be) digitally (manipulated). Artificial information about the environment and its objects can be overlaid on the real world.[4][5][6][7	What is Augmented reality

Please email me with ideas, thoughts, observations!  cathyandersonblog@gmail.com

I wanted to present here on what kind of professional development is most effective for faculty to learn new strategies to increase retention of students, it was that line of thought that brought me back around to a topic I posted a bit on a few months ago; professional learning communities.  I did a review of the literature to see if any research had been done on a possible link between institutions that have a structure of professional learning communities in place and student retention, I found some, but I would venture to guess that little research has been done in this area.  Much of the research focused on the benefits of Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) to K-12, however I believe they could be just as effective in colleges and universities, even though the research is sketchy in the application of PLCs to higher education.

I will start over again with professional learning communities and offer this overview.  Dufour (2004) speculated that the “title” of professional learning communities had become so watered down and applied to so many groups in education that it had really lost its definition and focus.  Dufour offered the following tenets of what a professional learning community does:  Ensure that students are learning. In order to achieve this aim he offers three critical questions that should drive the conversations of the PLC:  What do we want each student to learn, How will we know when each student has learned it, How will we respond when each student experiences difficulty in learning? The purpose of the PLC means that the instructor/teacher no longer addresses each student on his/her own, it is the school acting as a community to address student learning concerns, developing or improving programs and services to support the student, and monitoring the improvements and student progress.  (Dufour, R. What is a professional learning community? Educational Leadership, retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/may04/vol61/num08/What-Is-a-Professional-Learning-Community%C2%A2.aspx)

Dufour explains that a PLC creates a culture of collaboration.  It is this culture that breaks down silos, defines a common goal for achieving student success, and ensures a holistic view of the institution and how it operates.  The benefit of teachers working together to analyze each other’s practices, create a supportive environment focused on creating success for students and each other is powerful.  In fact as Fenn and Wells stated in their findings of a review of the literature that  “A core characteristic of the professional learning community is an undeviating focus on student learning (Louis & Kruse, 1995)” (p. 9). Teachers work collaboratively in PLCs to analyze student learning and work with students who are failing (DuFour & Eaker, 1998; Eaker, DuFour, & DuFour, 2002; Hord, 2004; Hord & Sommers, 2008; McLaughlin & Talbert, 2001, 2006). (Wells, C., Fenn, L. What has changed, a study of three years of professional learning Community Work. Planning and Change v. 39, No. 1., pp 42-66).  Ultimately the focus is on the results, the progress of students to successfully achieve their goals.  As Dufour states, “Working together to improve student achievement becomes the routine work of the school.”

Wells and Fenn sought to determine the efficacy of professional learning communities in each of the following domains:

• Supportive and shared leadership

• Collective creativity

• Shared values and vision

• Supportive conditions

• Shared personal practice

This study was based upon the following aim to  learn about the level of implementation of Professional Learning Community (PLC) principles at six high schools.   They found that the teachers identified strategies to develop student learning,t indicated the largest growth was in the area of collaboration, with teachers reporting that it was easier to collaborate with colleagues, and easier to approach and engage in a dialogue with each other as a result of the participation in the PLCs.

What the researchers learned was that teachers didn’t always believe the data and information regarding student progress stating that, by sharing information, planning, and working together. What they did not want to do, however, was to analyze student learning results and work to improve them, as indicated by this quote: “We rarely look at data and when we do, teachers often don’t buy it. There’s always a big disconnect. We don’t have a shared vision.”

The second study also revealed that teachers were not studying best educational practice or developing a shared knowledge base about student learning. So, while the strife settled down from the early days of implementation, the results of the survey interviews indicated that the teachers had settled into new behaviors of meeting together, but no other substantive change had occurred.

The irony of Fenn’s and Wells’ findings is that teachers were most resistant to the most often noted benefits of PLCs, mainly that:

• Intentionality of purpose—working in PLCs to improve teacher and student learning

• Collaboration—working in teams, instead of in isolation, for the purpose of analyzing student learning

Results-driven focus—reviewing outcomes as primary in importance over input of materials

• Action plans to interrupt failed learning

• Shared practice and collective inquiry—studying best educational practices

Ultimately the most often cited reason for the resistance was an issue of just not having the time to put into practice the tenets of PLCs, so it seems the experiences were very superficial.

However the following reasons were also cited:

• “Individual resistance.”

• “We discuss learning results overall but don’t have the time to review and disaggregate the data. The amount of time that it takes, it’s useless —forget it.”

• “Teachers are territorial. There’s a fear of comparison with each other.”

• “It’s a time issue. You get to the end of the unit and some didn’t do so well—what are you going to do now?”

• “Everyone has their own teaching techniques; there’s a divide in our department. Many are too bull-headed.”

• “We rarely talk about instruction.”

• “Teachers are always asking for more time to meet.”

• “It’s hit or miss.”

• “The veteran teachers are less likely to change.”

• “Not a lot of collaboration taking place.”

Ultimately though if administration does not define specific measurable outcomes from the application of PLCs, gather data and information, track results and provide that feedback to the teachers, it will be meaningless and seem to be time waster.   Providing a consistent loop of “Plan, do check and act” should be in place for the application and commitment to PLCs to have meaning and benefit.

In the January 2013 issue of the Community College Review, Jackson, Stebleton, and Laanan provide their findings in the article The experience of community college faculty involved in a learning community program. The study was based upon interview with 14 faculty members based upon their experiences in participating in PLCs on their campus.   Through this process four themes were identified:  Creating empathy and greater awareness,  building authentic student relationships, engaging in the larger campus community, promoting active collaboration and professional development with other faculty members.

The researchers concluded stating, “Faculty members can play a vital role in community colleges in helping to  engage and retain students. High-impact educational practices such as professional learning communities serve as one such tool to help students to meet academic, career and personal goals. ..”

Researchers, Jay R. Dee and Cheryl J. Daly state that, “Faculty development programs can play an important role on college and university campuses by acknowledging the human needs of faculty members, and by providing the resources, social networks, and innovative ideas that can foster the fulfillment of those needs.”   They define faculty development or professional development as, “Faculty development programs can be defined as organizationally supported initiatives designed to improve faculty performance or enhance the quality of faculty work life.”  Their findings strengthened the argument for PLCs stating that, :Faculty collaboration may be necessary to handle the rapid advances in instructional technology and in pedagogical  approaches. Moreover, this era represents another shift in emphasis from developing the individual faculty member to also strengthening the entire institution.”  ( Dee,J and Daly, C., (2009) Innovative Models for Organizing Faculty Development Programs Pedagogical Reflexivity, Student Learning Empathy, and Faculty Agency  HUMAN ARCHITECTURE: JOURNAL OF THE SOCIOLOGY OF SELF-KNOWLEDGE, VII, 1, WINTER 2009, 1-22)

I am going to revisit their comprehensive article for further insight in the future.  Ultimately some of what I believe they found includes an observation that the faculty networking, or in house professional development may prove more beneficial because it is a continuum not a  “one-shot’ deal.

The article abstract describes the program as follows:

This paper presents a unique faculty development program called GRASP (Gaining

Retention and Achievement for Students Program) developed at New Mexico State University. A fundamental assumption of GRASP is faculty are crucial to student retention and achievement,  hence the primary focus on faculty. GRASP focuses on incorporating faculty’s teaching behaviors which increase student retention and achievement. The program is composed of four interlaced components: assessment of student learning styles; faculty development to cultivate and implement appropriate teaching strategies; in-class observations and feedback of faculty and students’ classroom behavior; and assessment of the impact on student retention and achievement.

Some of their findings on best approaches to professional development for faculty included:

Get department and college support before recruiting faculty.

Provide continuous feedback.

Classroom observers should be staff instead of fellow faculty.

Provide information about the research.

Use students’ learning styles as a tool to help faculty make teaching changes.

Illustrate teaching strategies with examples in each faculty’s field.

Speak in the language of the faculty’s discipline.
.

Show student success.

Donnelly College established an action project addressing professional development for faculty with the following outcomes:

The College will have a clearly understandable program that (1) fosters an environment of faculty commitment to professional development; (2) helps ensure faculty are effective in the classroom with current knowledge and skills; (3) provides clear faculty professional development expectations; and (4) provides a clear understanding of the resources available to meet expectations.

Patricia L. Farrell states in the article  Investing in Staff for Student Retention that
Research on first-year programs and outside-the-classroom experiences points to the prominence of faculty for student retention.

She also identified that researchers noted three variables that impact retention:  Student variables are “inputs;” institutional variables, also inputs, include selectivity, size, institutional type and control, and gender and racial composition and environmental variables include  campus-based inputs and outcomes.

Micheal Herbert, in his article Staying the Course: A Study in Online Student Satisfaction and Retention  gave the following “concise” definitions of each below:

A review of the literature has shown that the variables most commonly cited as being important to retention can be grouped into three main categories. These categories as identified by Berge and Huang (2004) are:

1. Personal variables . These include demographics that encompass age, gender, and martial status; as well as variables such as academic skills and abilities, motivation, commitment and locus of control (Rotter 1966, Parker 1999, Kember 1995).

2. Institutional variables . This category includes variables such as academic, bureaucratic and institutional social variables (Willis 1994, Alexander, McKenzie, and Geissinger 1998).

3. Circumstantial variables . These include socio-economic variables, academic interactions, social interactions and life situation.

Professional development integrates the role of faculty with retention, rather than making retention and instruction two different functions.   As Vincent Tinto stated in his article, “This is the case because the classroom is, for many students, the one place, perhaps only place,
where they meet each other and the faculty. If involvement does not occur there, it is unlikely to occur elsewhere.1

In specific regard to faculty development Tinto observes:

Regarding faculty and staff development, it is increasingly clear that faculty actions, especially in the classroom, are critical to institutional efforts to increase student retention, but it is also clear that the faculty of our universities and colleges are, as a matter of practice, the only faculty from kindergarten through universities who are literally not trained to teach their students. Yet we know little about the ways in which investments in differing types of faculty development programs

impact rates of student retention. Though we have begun to link faculty pedagogy to student retention and therefore by inference to the importance of faculty development, that linkage has yet to be fully explored and tested.3

Having a website portal is essential to providing faculty and staff with access to the professional development resources they need to better understand role in student retention here are, what I thought good examples:

http://med.stanford.edu/smili/support/pedagogy.html

http://www.foothill.edu/staff/development/

National Center for Faculty Development and Diversity

Colorado University:

Teaching and Learning; Applying the Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education , edited by Arthur W. Chickering and Zelda F. Gamson (Jossey-Bass, 1991).

·         Good Practice Encourages Student-Faculty Contact

Frequent student-faculty contact in and out of classes is the most important factor in student motivation and involvement. Faculty concern helps students get through rough times and keep on working. Knowing a few faculty members well enhances students ‘ intellectual commitment and encourages them to think about their own values and future plans.

·         Good Practice Encourages Cooperation Among Students

Learning is enhanced when it is more like a team effort than a solo race. Good learning, like good work, is collaborative and social, not competitive and isolated. Working with others often increases involvement in learning. Sharing one’s own ideas an d responding to others’ reactions improves thinking and deepens understanding.

·         Good Practice Encourages Active Learning

Learning is not a spectator sport. Students do not learn much just sitting in classes listening to teachers, memorizing pre-packaged assignments, and spitting out answers. They must talk about what they are learning, write about it, relate it to past experiences, and apply it to their daily lives. They must make what they learn part of themselves.

·         Good Practice Gives Prompt Feedback

Knowing what you know and don’t know focuses learning. Students need appropriate feedback on performance to benefit from courses. In getting started, students need help in assessing existing knowledge and competence. In classes, students need frequent opportunities to perform and receive suggestions for improvement. At various points during college, and at the end, students need chances to reflect on what they have learned, what they still need to know, and how to assess themselves.

·         Good Practice Emphasizes Time on Task

Time plus energy equals learning. There is no substitute for time on task. Learning to use one’s time well is critical for students and professionals alike. Students need help in learning effective time management. Allocating realistic amounts of time means effective learning for students and effective teaching for faculty. How an institution defines time expectations for students, faculty, administrators, and other professional staff can establish the basis for high performance for all.

·         Good Practice Communicates High Expectations

Expect more and you will get it. High expectations are important for everyone — for the poorly prepared, for those unwilling to exert themselves, and for the bright and well motivated. Expecting students to perform well becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy when teachers and institutions hold high expectations for themselves and make extra efforts.

·         Good Practice Respects Diverse Talents and Ways of Learning

There are many roads to learning. People bring different talents and styles of learning to college. Brilliant students in the seminar room may be all thumbs in the lab or art studio. Students rich in hands-on experience may not do so well with theory. Students need the opportunity to show their talents and learn in ways that work for them. Then they can be pushed to learning in new ways that do not come so easily.

Institutions may find that each term there are numerous classes scheduled that are cancelled, while other classes reach their capacity early on and are closed. The uncertainty caused to students by cancelled and closed classes creates a poor image for the institution to the students it serves.

Often, in the case of the cancelled classes,  high demand classes may be  closed too early, thereby missing their true window of opportunity. Other classes consistently fill to capacity at the beginning of the registration period signaling a need to increase that particular course offering.

The benefits of having a collaborative review of how the class schedule may help determine how to be more effective and efficient in course scheduling. This includes the following an  analysis of how decisions are made to limit sections, who makes those decisions and/or cancel classes.  An analysis, that includes members from academics, institutional effectiveness and student services to determine how to be more effective, efficient and student centered is essential.  This analysis has the potential to result in a reduction or better management of overhead costs,  more effectively meeting the demands of increased numbers of students, and a more responsive and efficient way of offering a schedule that meets student and community demands, resulting in greater student satisfaction and increased enrollment.

Implementing an improved class schedule will result in the following:

1. Facilitates more reliable communication between faculty and staff about course offerings,
2. Improves alignment between course schedule and college catalog,
3. Minimizes waitlist activity,
4. Improves utilization of classrooms and other College services,
5. Expands offerings during underutilized time periods.
6. reduce class scheduling conflicts and maximize efficient use of classrooms

Some of the anticipated outcomes of improving the course scheduling process may result in the following:

• Class schedules will reflect address students’ needs; and optimize the capacity of the student to progress  toward degree completion in a timely fashion.
• Required courses will be scheduled at times that do not conflict.
• Class schedules will reflect a sound pedagogy and optimize student learning
• Departments, such as General Education, that support other majors will coordinate schedules. Other Core courses will be scheduled throughout the day and evening based upon a time that best meets the demands of students.
• To improve efficiencies if multiple sections of major courses are to be offered at the same day and time enrollments will be carefully monitored and sections combined if deemed more efficient.
• Courses will be noted and justification required each semester
• A list of scheduling best practices checklists and information should be developed and distributed to the academic departments.
• Efficiency in classroom use should be a priority consideration when on-line or blended courses require limited use of classroom space.

• Alternate calendar schedules and intersession classes between major semesters are
• The impact of the revised class schedule (to be implemented in Fall 2008), including but
• not limited to changes in student access to classes, student retention and progress, faculty
• satisfaction, and instructional space utilization, will be continuously evaluated for improvement.
• Class capacity/seats will be set at the maximum seat capacity to ensure that classroom use is optimized.  however there are exceptions which are granted for accreditation purposes, or sound pedagogical  reasons.
• Course scheduling finalized by one office for accuracy.

There are many reasons why institutions focus on retention. In addition to the call across the country and the presidential administration institutions recognize that it’s the right and ethical thing to do citing reasons such as:

By recognizing that many of the reasons students drop out can be reduced with some institutional programs and process changes and that their institution must look at more financially responsible ways to grow.  Some institutions, through new initiative to increase accountability, self-assessment and a better understanding of the data and information at hand recognize that retention is problem.  An inventory of their programs and services may bring to light that  few processes are developed and deployed to address the requirements of underprepared students and that we can improve many of the support processes that impact retention. Oftentimes, through this analysis of detailed data and information institutions recognize that they have making decisions based upon assumptions or anecdotal evidence.

The Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association requires that institutions implement action projects as part of the Academic Quality Improvement Program for accreditation some institutions make the development of a retention plan part of their AQIP process.  Lakeland College is one college that did so citing the following  rationale:

Our task is to create a retention plan that, when implemented, will improve student retention and degree attainment. College employees indicated a strong interest in student retention during Conversation Day and in a vote during Fall semester 2008. Faculty are aware that students do not always make steady progress toward their academic goals and often fail to complete courses even when earning satisfactory grades overall. Recognizing that community college students have significant risk factors, we believe that closer contact and communication with students will foster higher retention and success rates for Lakeland’s students.

Seward County Community College also identified the following:

Successfully implementing enrollment management requires collecting and analyzing data. The goal of this action project is to identify, review and analyze data on SCCC students to determine why SCCC has a low retention rate and to create a plan to address the needs of the students who are not retained. The plan will include student retention initiatives that will be monitored and reviewed by the SCCC

In 2007 Dr. Jeff Clark wrote the paper,  RETENTION: A Selected Critical Inventory of Best Practices,  this paper provides a solid overview of Retention presentations in higher education.

What I hope to present to you today is an overview of the common elements found in a student retention plan, based upon my experience and a review of several college’s plans and some direction to resources, such as Dr. Clark’s paper, that will assist your institution in retention planning.

Most plans provide an introduction. In the introduction, the institution provides the background information upon which the plan was developed.  This includes the history of the institution, the data and information upon which the plan was developed.

The introduction may also provide community information, which includes demographics information, background information on the demographics of the student body, and community support for the institution and the student.

This introduction may also provide information on how the retention plan was developed, some of these include:

• review of literature and best practices related to student retention;
• a self-study on the First-Year Experience at the college; retention consultant study to identify strengths
• gaps in current retention policies, practices and activities;
• review of current college retention data; survey of faculty and staff;
• meeting and open forums with faculty, staff, deans and other administrative staff.

More often the retention plan moves past all of this information and addresses why the institution has the urgency to address retention, the steps taken to develop the plan, and the baseline numbers used to develop the plan.

Often university wide committees for retention and graduation are appointed to holistically address the concern of retention for the institution.

Also found in the executive summary or introduction is the charge given to the committees formed to address retention; this usually is something like from Cleveland State University’s plan:

This plan will focus on engaging students early by way of email communications, activities and advisement. It makes the assumption that all previously identified strategies in the Faculty

Committee on Student Success will continue to be supported by all respective stakeholders.

Many institutions recognize that the “first year experience” is crucial as is evident from this website and the support provided by the University of South Carolina.

This is the home of the National Resource Center on the First Year Experience, according to the website it  serves as the trusted expert, internationally recognized leader, and clearinghouse for scholarship, policy, and best practice for all postsecondary student transitions. The following statements of mission and core commitments provide a foundation for these activities and guide the Center’s efforts.

The United States Department of Education has established an online resource center of best practices in retention for higher education.

As I noted earlier ACT provides information on a survey that they conduct of colleges on student retention.
2012 Reality of College Readiness Report This national report and the series of state reports trace the enrollment, retention, and transfer patterns of 2010 ACT-tested high school graduates.   In 2004 they reported the following: Primary findings from the study included the following.

• Institutions were far more likely to attribute attrition to student characteristics than to institutional characteristics.
• Respondents from all colleges in the study reported retention practices responsible for the greatest contribution to retention fell into three main categories.

1. First-year programs

2. Academic advising

3. Learning support

When asked to identify the three campus retention practices that had the greatest impact on student

retention, all survey respondents identified at least one of the following.

• Freshman seminar/university 101 for credit
• Tutoring program
• Advising interventions with selected student populations
• Mandated course placement testing program
• Comprehensive learning assistance center/lab

After reviewing the data and information, the institution will establish those priority issues they intend to address in the retention plan.   Gather data and information, such as the provided via the ACT survey, will allow the institution to identify best practices and develop the strategies that will provide them with the means to address their specific retention priorities.

Priorities maybe similar to these developed by Mount Wachusett Community College:

Visibility and Teamwork

Priority 1.0: Retention, completion, and student success initiatives are prioritized within the  college community. Faculty, staff, and students value student success and are engaged in a

continuous process of data-informed improvement to meet shared goals.

Learning-Centered Policies and Practices

Priority 2.0: Revise and/or create learning-centered policies, which align with institutional goals of student success and goal/degree completion.

Targeted Interventions

Priority 3.0: Existing resources will be strategically deployed using a data-informed decision making process, and in the absence of resources in the face of student need, new interventions to support students will be developed.

Motivational Communications

Priority 4.0: Intentional communications with students maintain and support continuous enrollment and student success.

Curriculum and Instruction

Priority 5.0 Faculty will redesign curriculum and instruction to integrate Active Learning Strategies and Student Success Skills to engage students in the learning process and improve

student retention.

After establishing the priorities institutions may capture them, the steps taken to implement them and the outcomes.  It is critical that these initiatives are captured, much in the same way that the North Carolina Community College System captured them in the comprehensive,  Retention Best Practices A collection of best practices from North Carolina Community Colleges.

As part of their strategic initiatives many institutions are creating positions that have a specific focus on retention, usually these positions are directly titled as “retention specialists, retention coordinators, or student success coordinate.”  Regardless the term “retention” is becoming  more and more common in job descriptions for higher education, a search of the HigherEdJobs data base using retention as   search term pulls more than 1000 jobs from vice presidents to coordinators.

Specific duties include:

Student Success Coordinator at Galen College of Nursing:

Provide academic support services, community resource referrals and other related services to support student retention and success in the nursing programs. Assist Galen’s faculty and staff in understanding the diverse academic, socioeconomic, cultural and ethnic backgrounds of the students.

Advisor/Recruiter- Immigration Advising & Retention Specialist at Eastern Washington University:

Retention Specialist at Montclair State University:   STATEMENT OF PURPOSE:
Under the direction of the Director of the Academic Success and Retention Programs (ASRP) Office, the Retention Specialist is responsible for providing academic counseling, major exploration activities and support services to numerous upperclassmen student cohorts, and monitoring progress toward degree completion. The Retention Specialist works with the director and other staff of the ASRP office to develop and deliver University-wide upperclassmen and transfer student success programming. In order to provide students with needed support services, the Retention Specialist will facilitate strong working relationships, fostering partnerships with academic departments within the Schools and College, and other University administrative offices. The Retention Specialist stays current on trends in the areas of academic advising, student retention, graduation rates and student services.

Retention specialist Lehigh University:

Develop and implement retention programs

• Develop new outreach opportunities.
• Follow up with enrolled students using existing office strategies.
• Promote student success through improved processes and individual customer service and support.
• Develop and maintain working relationships with COE department coordinators to provide academic program advising to enhance retention initiatives.

Learning disability specialist at Northeastern University:  Staff of the Learning Disabilities Program (LDP) is charged with the goal to increase the achievement and retention of NU students with learning disabilities and attention deficit disorders.

Seattle Community College recognizes the issues associated with planning for student retention, developing programs that addresses the student needs, the whole student.  Some of these programs include funding, child care,  and other services.  One critical service, is that of emergency grants:

The Emergency Grant Programs at the three colleges are designed to provide students with financial assistance in case of emergencies that put their academic success at risk. The programs serve students who have suffered personal property loss, emergency medical needs and other unforeseen emergency expenses. At each of the colleges, advisors and counselors report that emergency grant support is among their highest resource priorities.

After benchmarking where the institution is at establishing measurable goals will ensure that the college is measuring its progress.  Fairmont State University and Fairmont State Community & Technical College establishing the following goals in their plan:

Goal 1  Increase by 3 percent the retention rate of ñrst-tíme, fulHime associate and baccalaureate degree seeking students using the Fall 2003 cohort.

Goal 2  Increase the three- and six year graduation rates by 3 percent for first-time, full time associate and baccalaureate degree-seeking students using the fail 2003 cohort.

Goal 3 – Increase the retention rate of undeclared and provisional students by 3 percent  for the fall 2003 cohort.

Goal 4 -Increase the retention rate of developmental education students by 3 percent for the fall 2003 cohort.

Goal 5 – Increase the retention rate by 3 percent of off-campus students using the fall  2003 cohort.

Goal 6 -Increase the retention rate by 3 percent of special populations using the fall 2003 cohort.

Fairmont state also recognizes the importance of systematic review of the retention plan:

This plan is the beginning of the Fairmont State’s comprehensive retention plan. lt is a dynamic and constantly changing plan that will be reviewed annually by the Director of Retention, Retention Committee, and Presidents Cabinet. Strategies and action plans  will be assessed and those that are not effective will be replaced.

Why is getting a college education so important, therefore retention so successful degree attainment, because as Anthony Carnevale projects (via the Georgetown University Workforce Development Center):

Between 2008 and 2018, the economy will create 47 million jobs: 14 million new jobs and 33 million job openings to replace retiring baby boomers. Job openings that require at least some
postsecondary education or training will make up 64 percent of all job openings and will include
most long-term career jobs (Carnevale, Smith, and Strohl 2010). We project a cumulative increase of
• 5 million more job openings for people with master’s degrees or better,
• 11 million more job openings for people with bachelor’s degrees,
• 14 million job openings for people with some college or associate degrees,
• 17 million job openings for people with high school educations or less, and
• 15 million jobs for people with postsecondary certificates

It is short sighted to develop a retention plan around activities that you conduct with and for current students.  Retention beings before a student becomes a student with at your college or university.  These activities start with relationship building with K-12 to collaborate on developing programs and services that are designed to promote college  awareness and college preparedness.

This can be achieved through collaboration with K-12 to make sure our respective curriculum are aligned to produce high quality workforce credentials, certificates and degrees.

Furthermore Carnevale asserts, “that the aversion to integrating CTE programs into the secondary and post-secondary system is an opportunity lost. These programs keep students in high school and move them on to post-secondary education more effectively than college preparation does. They provide an alternative applied pedagogy for those who have not done well in academic curriculum.?

I agree with Careneval’s assertion, primarily because CTE provides a reality of what it actually means to be in a certain career.  By participating in the applied classroom or lab experience the student may actually be taught by career professionals from a certain career.

Career academies provide just such an opportunity.  According to the Career Academic website “career academies were first developed some 35 years ago with the aim of restructuring large high schools into small learning communities and creating better pathways between high school and further education and the workplace.”

According to the report; Career Academies Long-Term Impacts on Labor Market Outcomes,
Educational Attainment, and Transitions to Adulthood  MDRC found. Career Academies are defined by three distinguishing features: (1) they are organized as small learning communities to create a more supportive,  personalized learning environment; (2) they combine academic and career and technical curricula around a career theme to enrich teaching and learning; and (3) they establish partnerships with local employers to provide career awareness and work-based learning opportunities for students.

Partnerships between K-12 and Universities should result in some practices that are demonstrated to improve college preparedness.  It has been proven that the more college ready a student is the more likely he/she is to persist.  Some of those practices I have found on the web include:

From the career college website, “the AASCU report says college-readiness programs should be a priority on all campuses and include”:

1. Strong teacher-preparation programs;
2. Alignment between P-12 and post-secondary curricula;
3. Timely and useful feedback to high schools regarding the performance of their graduates; and
4. Availability of dual-credit programs and strategies to expand public-policy support to take this work to scale.

In addition to President Obama encouraging college completion many states are beginning to recognize the importance of college completion and are making it a part of their strategic direction.  An example of this is a statement from Georgia’s Complete College; Georgia’s Higher Education Completion Plan 2012.  One of the noted strategic priorities is for, “Expansion of the direct from high-school population through an improvement in college readiness and an overall increase in the high school graduation rate • Improvement in overall college completion rates and especially populations with historically low rates.”

In 2004 WestEd issued a policy brief that noted some ways in which K-12 and colllege could integrate and better prepare students for college.  Their strategies fell under two broader categories:

The strategies include:

• Students take college placement tests for diagnostic purposes in middle school and early high school.

• Performance on high school exams relates to college admission or placement decisions.

• Colleges share freshmen performance information with high school

• Faculties cross systems. When post-secondary professors work part-time in high schools and K–12 teachers also serve as teacher education faculty, teamwork blossoms

This report recommends that states plan as an “education system,” A K–16 plan provides a road-map for crafting silo-bridging policies (e.g., funding allocations that reward cross-system teacher preparation programs.)

Develop K–16 data systems. To get vital information about how their students fare in each segment, institutions need — and states generally lack — a cross-segment achievement data system.

Make no-stakes diagnostic testing part of the state testing program.

What have institutions done to address retention?  What are the action plans, activities and tasks assigned to improve retention.  I have conducted a review of several retention plans and I will identify the common tasks or activities they have identified.

I n 2010 the American Association of Community College Commission and Board of Directors put forth The Completion Agenda: A Call to Action

Commitment and How to Get It

Key Points

Responsibility for completion is shared throughout the institution and the community.

•        Completion must be embedded into the fabric of the institution: Relationships. Rigor. Relevance.

•        Students want to be engaged and involved in the completion agenda; they want the data.

•        We have a responsibility to increase completion rates, and we have a legacy to create.

•        Completion should be made a part of the institution’s strategic plan.

•        States that have the best policy framework achieve the best completion rates.

•        The community needs to be engaged with the framework.

•        The completion agenda must be transparent and data driven.

•        Community colleges must encourage the completion of certificates, degrees, etc. (which are valuable to your community, to your students, to business and industry).

•        We need to communicate clearly what completion means.

Tinto, a leader in studying student retention identified the following:   (1993) three principles: 1) Institutions are committed to the students they serve. The welfare of the student is primary, 2) Individuals at the institution are committed to the education of all students (not just some), and 3) Individuals at the institution are committed to the development of supportive social and academic communities in which all students are integrated as full members.

In 2007 the Massachusetts did an in depth review of the research and trends around the subject of student retention and found tht the following were factors:

• More than 60 percent of first-time, full-time, degree-seeking students enrolling in community colleges are not college ready and require developmental coursework. These students have lower graduation rates than college ready students.

• Early completion of developmental coursework is essential for successful retention and graduation.

• There are significant achievement gaps among groups of students based on income level, ethnicity, and gender.

• The three-year graduation rate for first-time, full-time, degree-seeking students who complete a degree at the initial institution in which they enrolled (IPEDS) is one important measure of student success. Exclusive use of this measure obscures the unique mission of community colleges and does not include two thirds of Massachusetts community college students.

• The Massachusetts community college student retention rate is comparable to the national average.

• There is incomplete data on and assessment of the effectiveness of existing programs and services available to help students succeed.

Institutions need to create a culture of “student success,” as part of their focus on retention planning.  The retention plan should be part of an institution wide focus and should be communicated institution wide.

Hallberg, Hallberg, and Sauer established a program  called Student Success Central, have isolated eight factors they have found to be essential to success in college. They are:

• Responsibility vs. control – first year students believe their instructors have morecontrol over their performance, while upper classmen increasingly accept responsibility for their own success. Students perceive themselves as more in control when they are involved.

• Competition – the competitive student, defined as academically prepared and assertive, is more likely to persist to graduation based on his/her commitment to the goal of college competition and his/her commitment to the institution.

• Task Precision – expecting to do well at class projects or tasks is directly related to persistence within the institution.

• Expectations – successful students set their own goals and expectations, seek and discover new and challenging experiences in college, and adopt a relative posture towards knowledge development.

• Wellness – increasing awareness that psychological factors impact student success have led to campaigns to inform students about the detrimental effects of stress, sleeplessness, poor nutrition, depression, and high levels of anxiety.

• Time Management – Planning ahead and determining time constraints in completing assignments is critical to success in college.

• College Involvement – the strong correlation between college involvement and student success is evidenced in residence life, campus jobs, friendships and informal peer interactions, extra-curricular activities, and faculty interaction – these elements of campus life provide important social rewards that become part of a student’s generalized evaluation of the costs and benefits of college attendance.

Family Involvement – encouragement and/or participation of one’s family in the college experience is an important factor in success in college.

The following are terms common to retention planning:

Retention vs. Persistence – Retention refers to the institution’s rate of moving students through the system, while persistence refers to the student’s rate of progression. Students persist; institutions retain.

Attrition refers to the rate at which students leave college or drop out. Attrition rates are the opposite of retention rates.

Stop-Out vs. Dropout – Dropping out refers to permanent departure from an institution. Stopping out refers to temporary departure. Students who stop out may appear to be dropping out, but some-times return to the original institution after a period of time.

Short-term retention rates are typically measured from one term to the next (e.g., from fall to spring semester). Some institutions also label retention from one fall term to the next fall term as short-term.

Long-term retention rates typically measure student persistence across multiple terms. Long-term retention, for example, might include measuring student persistence from initial entry to the institution through graduation.

Graduation rates are the proportion of students who graduate in a given period of time. The federal Student Right-to-Know legislation asks community colleges to identify how many entering students receive an associate’s degree in three years, while a six-year time frame for earning a bachelor’s degree is specified for four-year institutions.

Goals need to be established that will define what the retention plan will achieve or do.

Some of the strategies or tactics identified from various plans:

These are from

Priority 1: Expand interactions with area high schools and develop strategies to increase enrollment

Priority 2: Expand interaction with communities within service area, and create strategies to increase enrollment of adult students

Priority 3: Enhance marketing strategies via web, print, radio, and TV

Priority 4: Attract more students from underrepresented populations to enhance diversity in the student population

Priority 5: Use financial aid/scholarships as a tool to increase enrollment

Priority 6: Develop strategies which focus on student success and retention

Priority 7: Develop comprehensive enrollment data tracking

Faculty play a pivotal role in retention:

Task Description:

Faculty will be encouraged to develop effective retention strategies and implement them in their classrooms during 2009-2010.  Faculty will also be asked to attend workshops dealing with improving student retention.

From Portland Community College

Faculty…interested in ways you can promote student retention?

• Use MyPCC. MyPCC is an online community for PCC students, faculty, and staff. It provides access to email, registration, course tools, college announcements and all aspects of college business.my.pcc.edu
• Refer students to Panther Tracks online. This website gives students all the information they need to succeed at PCC. Campus resources, checklists, important deadlines, study tips, degree options, the list goes on! www.pcc.edu/panthertracks
• Introduce your students to MAP. Found on the MyPCC My Courses tab, MAP is an online academic planning tool with self assessments, worksheets, and career and academic resources. MAP was developed in collaboration with Oregon Career Information System.http://www.pcc.edu/resources/academic/retention/StudentRetention.html
• Use Course Progress Notification (CPN). Through the 2007 Noel-Levitz survey, PCC students stated that faculty providing timely feedback about course progress was of high importance, but that faculty did not do so regularly or to their satisfaction. Faculty can use CPN to communicate with students about attendance, class participation, completed coursework, current grades, and overall performance. http://www.pcc.edu/resources/academic/retention/CPN.html
• Encourage students to use GRAD Plan. GRAD Plan is available for all students and advisors to assess degree progress and remaining academic requirements. Students can consider different degrees and certificates, find the classes they need graduate, and create an academic plan with an advisor. Students can access their GRAD Plan from the MyPCC My Courses tab.http://www.pcc.edu/resources/advising/grad-plan
• Employ a few of the 110 Teaching Tips. Learn all your students names, have students evaluate the course regularly, let students test each other, have a colleague critique your class…all of these and more can be found at http://www.pcc.edu/resources/academic/retention/TeachingTips.html

From:  Eastern Connecticut State University “Student Success” Strategic Plan’s Initiative Proposal for Enhancing Student Retention and Timely Progress to Graduation:

Goals:  I. Goal:

To identify Academic Affairs and Student Affairs division policies and practices that promote or hinder timely progress to graduation, and then to develop an organizational structure for data collection and data review which will lead to increases in 4- and 6-year graduation rates

Phased in implementation plan

Assessment of effectiveness of the plan  and anticipated outcomes

College Forward program  is a comprehensive college access and retention program located in Austin, Texas, that serves low-income and first-generation college students.

The program provides some of the following college persistence services:

This includes:

• Support Services:
  - Annual support with FAFSA
  - Help finding and completing scholarship applications
  - Transfer assistance
  - Referrals to appropriate college services, as needed
• Regular Mailings:
  -Care packages during finals
  -Exclusive Collegian Newsletters every 2 months

• College Reunions and Events:
  - December Reunion
  - July Reunion
  - End of School Year Collegian Dinner

And

• Orientation to the college experience
• Preparation for college entrance examinations
• Assistance with college applications
• Assistance securing financial aid
• College persistence support

Seattle Community College System has launched a campaign for retention called Power and Promise:

The initiiatives include the following:

• Increasing assistance with “barrier” courses, especially math and English
• Offering peer assistance and mentoring to new students
• Building strong student cohorts and engaging students in group learning
• Providing free access to tutoring centers
• Creating customized programs for students of color
• Offering new student orientations that address stress, time-management and effective study-skills
• Using technology to track academic progress so that intensive advising can be offered when needed
• Making emergency loans and grants available

cathyandersonblog@gmail.com ..