STUDENT SUCCESS AT PURDUE
Appendix A: SI White Paper
WHO WE ARE
Revived in 2010, Purdue University’s Supplemental Instruction (SI) Program provides academic support communities of
higher-level thinkers and self-empowered learners. This self-selecting, course-specific, peer-led program seeks to
promote active, collaborative learning involving critical thinking and transferable study skills. Its efforts are aimed at
improving the retention rate of students enrolled in the SI-linked courses and helping students pass these courses at
higher rates.
Twenty-two student leaders currently supplement twelve different courses. Fifty percent of the Spring 2013 SI leaders
are on the Dean’s List. These promising young leaders represent fourteen different majors from six colleges, and they
are evenly divided between genders. In AY 2012-2013, Supplemental Instruction had 11,679 visits which served 2,253
unique students (5.2 visits per student).
CURRENT SI COURSES (SPRING 2013 and FALL 2013)
BIO 110
BIO 111
BIO 203
BIOL 204
CHM 111
CHM 112
CHM 115
CHM 116
CHM 129
CS 158
CS 159
MA 153
MA 154
MA 158
MA 161
MA 162
ME 200
MGMT 200
MGMT 201
PHYS 172
“Students are keenly aware that our SI leaders recently took
these courses and were very successful in them. This gives our SI
leaders a unique perspective and insight that my students,
understand, appreciate, and make good use of.”
--Johnny E. Brown
Professor of Mathematics
CONTRIBUTIONS TO STUDENT SUCCESS
SI contributes to the institutional goal of enhancing retention rates, graduation rates, GPA success, and satisfaction
levels of Purdue students by:
 Offering peer-to-peer, weekly academic study sessions for students enrolled in foundational courses
 Providing an environment where students learn to ask thoughtful, course-specific, conceptual questions of
themselves and each other
 Exchanging study strategies that can apply to non-SI courses as well
 Increasing students’ confidence in attacking tough course material
 Enhancing leadership skills and opportunities for students
Student Success at Purdue  Maggie Konich, Assessment Specialist  mkonich@purdue.edu
400 Centennial Mall Drive ENAD 212  West Lafayette, IN 47907-2016
(765) 496-3754  Fax (765) 496-6752  TTY (765) 496-1373  studentsuccess@purdue.edu  www.purdue.edu/studentsuccess
CONTRIBUTIONS TO STUDENT SUCCESS (cont.)
As a result of participating in SI, attendees will:
 Increase their understanding of course concepts and be able to apply them to different sets of problems
 Develop critical thinking skills that mature beyond memorization in a way that enables them to evaluate, analyze
and demonstrate evidence of their learning
 Acquire transferrable study skill behavior which will allow students to become more confident in their approach
to mastering difficult material
 Recognize that mistakes are a great learning tool
 Usually earn a higher course grade than their peers who did not attend the study sessions
EVIDENCE OF SUCCESS
Students who frequently participate in Supplemental Instruction show lower incidents of DFW grades and a higher
number of A’s received than their eligible counterparts who do not attend an SI session.
% of Students
Grades by SI Participation
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
A
B or better
C or better
Fall Spring Fall
2011 2012 2012
Fall Spring Fall
2011 2012 2012
8+ SI Sessions
DFW
No SI Sessions
This holds mostly true at the individual course level as well.
Grades by Course (Spring 2012)
100
80
60
40
20
0
SI AB grades
Non-SI AB grades
Compared to peers in the same courses, SI participants consistently earn higher GPAs.
SI Participants
Non-SI Participants
Fall 2012
Semester
3.00
2.91
Cumulative
2.99
2.75
Spring 2013
Semester
2.99
2.76
Cumulative
3.09
2.91
Bold means difference between groups was significant at p<0.05
EVIDENCE OF SUCCESS (cont.)
Within Supplemental Instruction, attendees of
Participation
Fall 2012
Semester
2.98
3.08
3.16
3.21
1-2 sessions
3-4 sessions
5-7 sessions
8+ sessions
Spring 2013
Semester
2.89
3.05
2.93
3.22
Cumulative
3.03
3.12
3.19
3.24
Cumulative
3.03
3.11
2.99
3.24
Bold means difference from 1-2 sessions was significant at p<0.05
Bold Italic means difference from1-2 sessions was significant at p<0.10
Students report high levels of satisfaction with Supplemental Instruction (Fall 2012).
Questions with Strongly Agree or Agree Responses:
The SI study sessions helped me understand the course material
better.
Through SI, I have learned some techniques to succeed in this course
such as how to take multiple choice exams, how to prepare for exams,
anti-procrastination strategies, or other study skills.
Through working together with my peers, I have been able to develop
new thinking strategies.
I believe I can apply some of the techniques I learned in SI to succeed
in other courses.
I believe my grade improved, in part, through participating in SI study
sessions.
I would recommend SI study sessions to a friend.
5-7
visits
95%
8+ visits
67%
73%
64%
62%
69%
73%
85%
82%
95%
90%
94%
SELF SELECTION
Students who participate in SI show a consistent pattern of higher high school GPAs and lower standardized test scores.
It seems SI students are capable of achieving long term success but are not as adept at one-time assessments such as
exams. Considering that a majority of SI courses are exam based (i.e. they are not courses where one can draft and
redraft assignments), the SI services are a valuable retention tool to help those students who may not test as well but
can succeed with differentiated instruction and support.
Course
Fall 2012
BIOL 110
CHM 116
MA 162
MGMT 200
PHYS 172
STAT 113
HS GPA
SI
Non
3.70
3.68
3.75
3.57
3.74
3.68
3.61
3.64
3.67
3.53
3.75
3.35
SAT (V+M)
SI
Non
933
924
749
865
819
860
959
952
919
924
993
888
ACT
SI
No
25.6
25.2
27.5
24.9
28.2
22.9
25.9
27.0
28.6
25.8
29.1
23.9
Spring 2013
BIOL 111
BIOL 204
CHM 116
MA 153
MA 162
MGMT 200
PHYS 172
3.68
3.65
3.74
3.30
3.82
3.55
3.82
3.72
3.61
3.76
3.36
3.61
3.59
3.76
976
897
947
669
922
798
834
985
871
891
804
943
911
906
24.9
25.3
25.8
21.6
27.5
25.1
28.9
26.8
25.3
28.6
23.4
27.9
26.2
29.4
Bold means difference between groups was significant at p<0.05
Bold Italic means difference between groups was significant at p<0.10
DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
In AY 2012-2013, Supplemental Instruction had 11,679 visits which served 2,248 unique students.
In Fall 2012, 1,489 students used SI and 3,956 eligible students did not. In Spring 2013, 1,115 students used SI and 4,793
did not.
SI Participants
1,489
1,115
Fall 2012
Spring 2013
Non-Participants
3,956
4,793
In both semesters, SI participants were more likely to be female, Black or African-American, and Hispanic/Latino than
their non-participating classmates. In Spring 2013 they were also more likely to be Asian, international students, and
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander when compared to non-participants.
Male
Female
2 or more races
Am. Indian or
Alaska Native
Asian
Black or Af-Am
Hispanic/Latino
International
Native Hawaiian or
Other Pacific
Islander
Unknown
White
Fall 2012
SI Participants
Non-Participants
42.2%
64.5%
57.8%
35.5%
Spring 2013
SI Participants
Non-Participants
41.0%
58.2%
59.0%
41.8%
1.9%
0.1%
2.0%
0.2%
1.4%
0.1%
2.3%
0.1%
5.1%
4.8%
5.8%
7.7%
0.1%
6.0%
3.5%
4.0%
17.7%
0.1%
5.1%
4.9%
5.5%
14.5%
0.3%
4.9%
4.4%
4.1%
10.9%
0.1%
2.2%
72.1%
1.7%
65%
1.5%
66.8%
1.6%
71.7%
Fall 2012 Ethnicity Comparison
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
SI Participants
20.00%
Non-Participants
10.00%
0.00%
Spring 2013 Ethnicity Comparison
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
SI Participants
20.00%
Non-Participants
10.00%
0.00%
RETURNING STUDENTS
There were 346 (15%) students who took multiple SI courses. Below is a table that shows the coupling of Fall 2012
courses (vertical listing) with the Spring 2013 courses (horizontal listing).1 The most popular pairing is Biology 110 and
Biology 111. Out of the 114 BIOL 110 students who took another SI course, 84 of them took BIOL 111. BIOL 110 is
required for many majors but its sequel, BIOL 111, is only required for certain majors. Other sequel SI courses are BIOL
203/4, CHM 115/6, and MA 161/2.
Additionally, 11 students took the same course both semesters (highlighted yellow). Nine improved from DFW to C- or
better, one student moved from C to B-, and one student did not improve (W to F).
It should be noted that one of the program goals of Supplemental Instruction is to increase students’ self-efficacy and
self-advocacy and to teach them transferrable study and test-taking skills. A low return rate should not be necessarily
viewed as a negative statistic.
Crosstab of Students Taking More Than One SI Course
Sp 13→
Fa 12 ↓
BIOL 110
BIOL 203
CHM 115
CHM 116
CS 159
MA 153
MA 161
MA 162
MGMT 200
PHYS 172
Total
Total
114
67
74
9
1
20
29
19
1
11
345
BIOL
111
BIOL
204
84
14
61
1
2
2
1
CHM
112
CHM
115
CHM
116
CS
158/9
MA
153
MA
154
MA
161
MA
162
MGMT
200
PHYS
172
6
3
9
1
1
2
1
16
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
3
1
1
7
1
5
1
1
1
5
1
101
65
1
15
2
6
1
2
22
21
3
4
2
2
2
6
7
1
23
3
41
1
10
5
3
11
2
2
24
4
4
2
1
1
20
10
4
16
COST SHARING OPPORTUNITY
Since Student Success at Purdue has limited funding from the Office of the Provost to expand Supplemental Instruction,
individual colleges have the opportunity to link with the program by funding a leader for the desired course.
Benefits to Your Department:
 Financial benefit (Tutoring costs versus SI Leader costs)
 Opportunity to share in the nomination and selection of SI Leaders
 Reports on attendance and grade outcomes by individual course
1
There were two students who took two SI courses in Fall 2012 but no courses in Spring 2013. Their pairings were BIOL 110—PHYS
172 and BIOL 110—CHM 115.
COST SHARING OPPORTUNITY (cont.)
Departmental Expectations:




$2,200 per student leader per semester
Supplying the student leader with the textbook for that course
Optional participation in the interviewing of candidates for this position
Support from the professor of the course in the form of endorsing the study sessions to the students enrolled in
the course, and by meeting weekly with the student leader to exchange ideas and feedback
CONTACT INFORMATION
If you are interested in adding Supplemental Instruction to one of your courses, please contact Ethel Swartzendruber at
swartzen@purdue.edu or 4-8507.
EXTERNAL SUPPORTING LITERATURE
Higher GPA/Lower DFW
Blat, C. M., & Nunnally, K. (2004). Successfully applying the Supplemental Instruction model to engineering and preengineering. Conference Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering
Education Annual Conference & Exposition.
Bye, L. A. (2005). Student achievement and retention in relation to supplemental instruction provided for two first-year
science courses. (Master of Arts thesis), University of South Dakota, Vermillion, SD.
Drake, R. G., & Foresman, G. (2012). The impact of faculty and peer-led Supplemental Instruction: Comparing two
disparate courses. Mountain Rise: The International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 7(2).
Gattis, K. W. (2000). Long-term knowledge gains due to Supplemental Instruction in college chemistry courses. Journal of
Research and Development in Education, 33(2), 118-126.
Gattis, K. W. (2002). Responding to self-selection bias in assessments of academic support programs: A motivational
control study of Supplemental Instruction. The Learning Assistance Review, 7(2), 26-36.
Hensen, K. A., & Shelley, M. C. (2003). The impact of Supplemental Instruction: Results from a large, public, Midwestern
university. Journal of College Student Development, 44(2), 250-259.
Kibble, J. D. (2009). A peer-led supplemental tutorial project for medical physiology: Implementation in a large class.
Advances in Physiology Education, 33(2), 111-114.
Macisaac, D. L., Falconer, K. A., & Maxka, C. (2003). Using Supplemental Instruction to improve minority success in
gatekeeper science courses.
Maim, J., Bryngfors, L., & Morner, L.-L. (2012). Supplemental Instructional for improving first year results in engineering
studies. Studies in Higher Education, 37(6), 655-666.
Moore, R., & DeLee, O. (2006). Supplemental Instruction and the performance of developmental education students in
an introductory biology course. Journal of College Reading & Learning, 36(2), 9-20.
Ogden, P., Thompson, D., Russell, A., & Simons, C. (2003). Supplemental Instruction: Short- and long-term impact.
Journal of Developmental Education, 26(3), 2-4. 6, 8.
Persistence
Blat, C., Myers, S., Nunnally, K., & Tolley, P. (2001). Successfully applying the Supplemental Instruction model to
sophomore-level engineering courses. Conference Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 2001 American Society
for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition.
Bronstein, S. B. (2007). Supplemental instruction: Supporting persistence in barrier courses. University of Massachusetts
Amherst, Amherst, MA.
Bye, L. A. (2005). Student achievement and retention in relation to supplemental instruction provided for two first-year
science courses. (Master of Arts thesis), University of South Dakota, Vermillion, SD.
Congos, D. H., & Schoeps, N. (2003). Inside Supplemental Instruction sessions: One model of what happens that
improves grades and retention revisited. Journal of Student Centered Learning, 1(3), 161-172.
Hensen, K. A. (2005). Examining the relationship between Supplemental Instructors (SI) and student retention at a
doctoral extensive institution. (Ph.D. dissertation), Iowa State University, Ames, IA.
Lin, J.-L., & Woolston, D. C. (2008). Important lessons in engineering education learned from seven years of experience in
undergraduate academic support programs. Conference Proceedings of the ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education
Conference, Saratoga Springs, NY.
Ogden, P., Thompson, D., Russell, A., & Simons, C. (2003). Supplemental Instruction: Short- and long-term impact.
Journal of Developmental Education, 26(3), 2-4. 6, 8.
Rath, K. A., Peterfreund, A. R., Xenos, S. P., Bayliss, F., & Carnal, N. (2007). Supplemental Instruction in Introductory
Biology I: Enhancing the performance and retention of underrepresented minority students. CBE-Life Sciences
Education, 6, 203-216.
Warner, J. M. (2008). Supplemental instruction for non-science majors biology students: Meanings and influences on
science identities for women. (Ph.D. dissertation), University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, NC.