Mathematics Support Centres: The need for early and
contextualised supports.

Donal Healy
 Ciaran O’Sullivan
 Paul Robinson
Irish Maths Support Network
5th Irish Workshop on Maths Learning and Support Centres
4 th Feb, 2011
NUIG.
Talk Structure:
Insights on timing and nature of supports and interventions
from report reviewing first year student progression on
certificate engineering students over a 6 year period.
In particular:
Dialogue arising from such an examination of the effectiveness
of student supports informing a major structural change in
engineering course provision.
Key finding: importance of early and contextualised supports
Implications (in the wider context of retention debate) for Maths
Support Centres:
Directly connecting to the lecture/tutorial room experience
Catalysts for enhancing student involvement with learning
through the building of learning communities.
ELSU Project Report:
Background Information.
For ELSU to be successful it would need to :







be aimed at first year full-time engineering students
be highly structured
have extended intensive contact with students who are most
likely to drop out,
be interlocked with other programs and services,
have a strategy of engagement using qualified staff
focus on the affective and cognitive needs of the student as
suggested by Levitz et al [*] and others.
be a catalyst for changes in institutional culture and student
attitudes regarding completion of programmes.
* Levitz, R., Lee, N & Richter, B.J., 1999, New Directions for Higher Education 108:31-49
Tinto V.; 1993, "Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition" ( 2nd ed.).
University of Chicago Press.
ELSU Project Report:
Background Information.
Higher Certificate in
Mechanical
Engineering,
Academic
Higher Certificate
ElectroHigher Certificate Ordinary Degree in
year
in Electronic
Mechanical
in Mechanical
Mechanical
commencing
September:
Engineering
Systems
Engineering
Engineering
School
2003
71
13
90
174
2004
62
14
70
146
2005
33
27
54
114
2006
50
30
49
23
152
2007
30
30
43
28
131
2008
41
26
67
16
150
Partitioning of Students by
Mathematics and Physics
Group 3
Summary description of partition category
C (OLC) grade or higher in Maths and studied LC
Physics
C (OLC) grade or higher in Maths and didn't study
LC Physics
D (OLC) Maths and studied LC Physics
Group 4
D (OLC) Maths and didn't study LC Physics
Group 5
Not Trackable
Group 1
Group 2
2003-2004 First Year cohort in Higher Certificates in
School of Engineering
Not Trackable
7%
D (OLC)
Maths and
didn't study LC
Physics
25%
D (OLC)
Maths and
studied LC
Physics
8%
C grade or
higher in
(OLC) Maths
and studied
LC Physics
31%
C grade or
higher in
Maths and
didn't study LC
Physics
29%
% in each partition
Commencin
g first year
in
September
of:
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
C grade or
Number of
C grade or
higher in
D (OLC)
D (OLC)
Students on
higher in
Maths and Maths and
Maths and
Not
1st Year
(OLC) Maths
didn't
studied LC didn't study LC Trackable Engineering
and studied
Certificate
study LC
Physics
Physics
LC Physics
Courses
Physics
31.0%
19.9%
24.6%
16.3%
11.7%
12.7%
29.3% 7.5%
39.7% 15.8%
29.8% 15.8%
33.3% 10.1%
34.0% 4.9%
41.0% 9.7%
25.3%
23.3%
28.9%
31.0%
45.6%
32.1%
6.9%
1.4%
0.9%
9.3%
3.9%
4.5%
174
146
114
129
103
134
Numbers in each partition
Commencin
g first year
in
September
of:
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
C grade or
Number of
C grade or
higher in
D (OLC)
D (OLC)
Students on
higher in
Maths and Maths and
Maths and
Not
1st Year
(OLC) Maths
didn't
studied LC didn't study LC Trackable Engineering
and studied
Certificate
study LC
Physics
Physics
LC Physics
Courses
Physics
54
29
28
21
12
17
51
58
34
43
35
55
13
23
18
13
5
13
44
34
33
40
47
43
12
2
1
12
4
6
174
146
114
129
103
134
Comments
1. the decrease in the number of students studying Leaving Certificate
Physics is a point of note (and concern).
2. offering of the ab-initio Ordinary Degree in Mechanical Engineering
has led to a marked decrease from September 2006 onwards in the
number of students in the category C grade or higher in (OLC)
Maths and studied LC Physics (decreased from 31% in 2003 to
12.7% in 2008).
3. number of students in the D (OLC) Maths and studied LC Physics is
consistently the smallest category and therefore is expected to be
influenced greatly by small changes in student performance as one
student passing or not passing in this category will have a larger
effect in percentage terms when considering pass rates for this
category of student.
Changes
Learning Support changes:
2003
ELSU set-up with proactive flexible supports
2006
ELSU expanded to Science
2006
ELSU becomes LSU
2007
LSU becomes CELT
2010
Cert changes:
2006
ab-initio Ordinary Degree in
Mechanical Engineering
introduced
2008
re-designed Cert introduced
2011
changes to entry standards
and early engagement
CELT loses key staff
Indicators of student success??
1. Performance in Leaving Certificate
Mathematics and having studied Physics in
Leaving Certificate as indicators of first year
success.
2. Student interest/early engagement as
indicators of success
3. First in family to college as an indicator of
success.
Performance of students in
each partition category:
C grade or
C grade or
Commencing
higher in (OLC) higher in D (OLC) Maths D (OLC) Maths Overall
first year in
Maths and
Maths and and studied and didn't study pass
September
studied LC didn't study LC Physics
LC Physics
rate:
of:
Physics
LC Physics
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
90.7%
65.5%
71.4%
52.4%
50.0%
70.6%
70.6%
56.9%
52.9%
48.8%
37.1%
52.7%
30.8%
56.5%
50.0%
38.5%
80.0%
30.8%
40.9%
38.2%
21.2%
37.5%
8.5%
25.6%
63.8%
53.4%
47.4%
43.4%
29.1%
43.3%
Student interest/early engagement as
indicators of success 1 Maths Head-start
Mathematics Head-Start
Workshops
% Attending
31.3%
% Not attending
68.7%
Proportions passing first year by attendance at 2008 Mathematics Headstart Workshop with overall passing rate
% pass rate of those attending
Maths Head-start:
% pass rate of those NOT
attending Maths Head-start:
% pass rate
overall
64.3%
33.7%
43.3%
2008
Proportion of students in each Maths grade category passing first year
Maths grade on entry
% of this category passing who % of this category passing who did
attended Maths Head-start in 2008 not attend Maths Head-start in 2008
C grade or higher in (OLC)
80.0%
Maths
D grade ( OLC)
42.9%
Mathematics
of 25 students 44.7% of 47 students
of 14 students 21.4% of 42 students
Student interest/early engagement as
indicators of success 1 Physics Head-start
Physics Head-Start
Workshops
% Attending
32.8%
% Not attending
67.2%
Proportions passing first year by attendance at 2008 Physics Head-start
Workshop with overall passing rate
% pass rate of those attending
Physics Head-start:
% pass rate of those NOT
attending Physics Headstart:
% pass rate
overall
68.1%
31%
43.3%
Proportion of students by physics or not at LC passing first year
2008
At risk due to Physics
grade on entry
had studied LC Physics
had NOT studied LC
Physics
% of this category passing
% of this category passing
who attended Head-start in who did not attend Head-start
Physics
in Physics
75.0% of 8 students 45.5% of 22 students
68.8% of 32 students 27.3% of 66 students
Student interest/early engagement as
indicators of success 2
Attendance at water rocket event at end of week 1 of semester 1.
Proportion of students attending or not the water rocket orientation session:
Attending
Not attending
Total number of
students HC Mech or EM
44.1%
55.9%
93
Comparison of student first year performance between those attending
and not attending the water rocket orientation session:
% pass rate of those
attending water rocket
event
% pass rate of those
NOT attending water
rocket event:
% pass HC Mech or EM
61%
23.1%
39.9%
First in family to college as an indicator
of success
Proportions of students passing in categories based on answering
the first in family survey question
Proportion of
Proportion of
students
students passing
Proportion of passing who
Commencing
who answered
students
answered YES
first year in
NO to First in
passing
to First in
September of:
family to go to
overall.
family to go to
third level
third level
question.
question.
2006
2007
2008
43.4%
29.1%
43.3%
43.8%
45.5%
80%
41.4%
37.1%
62.1%
Proportion of
students
passing who
Didn’t
Answer First
in family to go
to third level
question
44.1%
15.2%
28.2%
Conclusions from ELSU report
Factors which must be considered in providing students with the best
opportunities of achieving success in first year engineering:
Mathematics level ( local and national evidence)
Physics studied previously
Early engagement
See Recommendations Slide Later
Implications (in the wider context of retention
debate) for Maths Support Centres:
Recent HEA report ‘A Study of Progression
in Irish Higher Education’
Change to the funding model
One day conference launching report: 28/10/10
Thought provoking presentations from among others :Prof. Vincent
Tinto from the US, Dr Ted Fleming NUIM and Dr. Sean Mc Donagh.
See
http://www.hea.ie/en/node/1386
International context as highlighted by Professor Vincent Tinto
International context as highlighted by Professor Vincent
Tinto at HEA conference.
Enhancing Student Retention: Lessons Learned in the United States Vincent
Tinto Distinguished University Professor Syracuse University
1. Conditions for Student Retention
2. Forms of Effective Practice
3. Lessons learnt
Tinto: Conditions for Student Retention.
Expectations – high expectations
Implications for need for care in phrasing around
supports
Alignment/connection of academic supports with
classroom experience:
‘contextualised academic support’
Frequent assessment AND feedback:
EARLY assessment – 3-4 weeks at the LATEST
Student involvement in academic and social life
Having a friend
Tinto:
Forms of Effective Practice.
WHAT to provide
1.
Advising
2.
Financial, academic and social supports
Supplemental Instruction
http://www.umkc.edu/cad/si
Embedded academic supports
http://www.highereducation.org/reports/Policy_Practice/IBEST.pdf
KEY FOR EITHER is linking to a particular class
Tinto: Forms of Effective Practice.
WHAT to provide ctd.
3.
Learning Communities
Particularly effective
http://www.evergreen.edu/washcenter/home.asp
Linked classes
WHEN to provide
Early in first year
Signals Project at Purdue University
http://www.itap.purdue.edu/tlt/signals/
Tinto: Lessons Learnt
Effective Higher Education Institutes:
Focus on first year
Pursue intentional structured and systemic action
Retention is everyones business
Across boundary co-operation
Don’t invest in discrete unconnected actions
Go for institutional change to embrace learning
communities etc.
Recommendations in ITTD
 Review the entrance level for the certificate
 Structure of the first weeks of the student experience in a way that
students are encouraged to engage immediately
a) Establish study groups in 1st year
b) CA in Week 3 in every module (15min test) with immediate
feedback –to drive them into a study group and to give clear
indication of who is not participating actively)
c) PAL concept
d) Orientation week refined to be just getting started with
team building exercises, key engineering skills, i.e,
calculators, library visits etc built in.
Mechanism which can react proactively to the needs of students who are
not immediately engaging with their course of studies. - CELT
For Maths Learning Centres……
Seek to be a key catalyst in retention efforts across HEIs
– ideally positioned to influence.
MLCs more pro-actively engage with Depts to promote the
structuring of the first weeks of the student experience in a way
that students are encouraged to engage immediately
a) Establish study groups in 1st year
b) CA in Week 3 in Maths module (15min test) with
immediate feedback –to drive them into a study group
and to give clear indication of who is not participating
actively)
c) Active promotion of Maths Learning Centre facilities
in weeks 1 and 2 ( now in a context of the early CA)