Supplemental Instruction (SI)
at Riverside City College
Unlocking the 21st Century Learner
Introductions
Marilyn Martinez-Flores, Ph.D., Dean of Academic Support
Rebecca Moon-Stone,
Moon-Stone SI Coordinator
Myung Hwa Koh, Ph.D., Outcomes Assessment Specialist
UMKC Model for Supplemental
Instruction (SI)
• S
Supplemental
l
l Instruction
I
i (SI) iis an academic
d i assistance
i
program that utilizes regularly scheduled, peerpeerfacilitated studyy sessions.
• Sessions are informal; students compare notes, discuss
readings, develop organizational tools, and predict test
items.
• Students learn to integrate course content and study
skills
kill while
hil working
ki collaboratively.
ll b
i l
• Students learn skills that allow them to be successful in
their
th i currentt courses and
d th
throughout
h t th
their
i academics.
d i
www.umkc.edu/cad/si/overview.html
UMKC Model for Supplemental
Instruction (SI) – cont.
cont
• Sessions are led by SI leaders-leaders--those
those students who have
previously done well in the course and attend all class
lectures, take notes, and act as “model” students at all
times.
• Trained in collaborative learning techniques and in the
integration of content and study skills
Students’ “near
near peers”
peers
• Students
• SI sessions are voluntary and free to students
The Purpose of SI is…
• T
To increase
i
retention,
t ti
to
t iimprove student
t d t grades,
d
and to raise student graduation rates within
targeted historically difficult courses
• at
at--risk students vs. atat-risk courses
• early implementation avoids remedial stigma
• “each institution may develop its own definition of ‘high‘high-risk
courses’” (Martin & Arendale,
Arendale, 1994)
• theoretical framework based on seminal learning theories
•
•
•
•
Vgotsky – Social Interdependence Theory
Skinner – Behavior Theory
Piaget – Cognitive Development Theory
Kozol – Interpretive/Critical Theory
SI at RCC
• SIs are placed in developmental education courses in
English, Reading, Math and English as a Second
Language (ESL)
• SIs are also placed in all of our basic skills Community
for Academic Progress (CAP) Learning Communities,
Communities
some CTE and STEM courses
• Study Group Leaders (SGLs) work with multiple
sections of a single course level and utilize the same
collaborative group strategies
• Typically Math or Science disciplines
SI at RCC - cont.
• Funding for SI:
• Funding provided through CCRAA/STEM and/or BSI
Initiative
• Technology component:
• Both SIs and SGLs participate in iTunes U podcasting
projects
j
(ADA C
Compliant)
li )
• In addition to a comprehensive fullfull-day training and ongoing
in--services, RCC offers a forum for SIs to discuss strategies
in
and collaborate via Facebook
• Marketing tool via email, individual SIL websites
(TeacherWeb
TeacherWeb),
) social networking sites ((MySpace,
),
Facebook,, etc.), text messaging
Facebook
http://itunesu.rcc.edu – Click on Public Access
Mock SI Session
Dawn Blood, Reading SI Leader
Michael Nguyen, English SI Leader
Recruitment & Hiring
• Recruitment
•
•
•
•
Faculty recommendation forms
SI Leader recommendation
End--ofEnd
of-Term survey
Advertisingg
• Hiring
• Panel Interview
• Application (required faculty recommendation)
• Demonstration lesson on special topic (faculty
(faculty--driven)
• General
G
l HR requirements
i
Data Collection/Forms
/
• Beginning
g
g of Term Surveyy
• Assesses student’s initial impression of SI and
student self
self--assess their behavior (note(note-taking, etc.)
• Beginning
Beginning--of
of--Term Benchmark
Week 3
• Measures student initial behavior
and NOT academic performance
• Mid - Term
T
Benchmark
B h
k
• Measures changes in student behavior
and initial academic performance/grade
Week 8
Data Collection/Forms
/
– cont.
• End
End--ofof-Term Survey
• Assesses student’s overall impression
of SI and student selfself-assess their behavior
(note--taking, etc.) - measures changes from
(note
Week 3
• End
End--ofof-Term Post SI Survey (for SI group only)
• Measures students self
self--reported classroom
behavior and nature of services provided
through SI sessions
• End
E d-of
Endoff-Term
T
Benchmark
B h
k (Mid(Mid-point
i @ 66wks.)
k )
• Measures changes in student behavior
and academic performance/grade to assess
academic growth
Finals Week
Other Data Collection/Forms
/
• Forms Collected by SI leaders:
– Schedule Request Form
– Planning Form
• Course/Section information
• Implementation
I l
i plan/nature
l /
off services
i rendered
d d
– Sign
Sign--In Form
• Timing of services
• Other data Elements
•
•
•
•
•
•
Demographics (age, gender, ethnicity, special groups
Course ggrade/semester GPA
Success rate
Average attendance rate
Term--to
Term
to--term persistence
C
Control
l group ((w/in
/i group)) – eliminates
li i
ffaculty
l variable
i bl
Students Served
•
During fall 2007 and spring 2008 academic year
year, 591 SI sessions were offered in 58
courses across five disciplines (English, ESL, Mathematics, Reading and Speech) to
660 students. FortyForty-six (46) students participated in SGL sessions in Mathematics.
•
During
D
i fall
f ll 2008 and
d spring
i 2009 academic
d i year, 22,694
694 SI sessions
i
were offered
ff d iin 58
courses across 10 disciplines (English, ESL, Mathematics, Reading, Speech,
Humanities, Library, Sociology, Automotive Technology and Film Television) to 643
students. Two hundred forty
forty--one (241) students participated in SGL sessions offered
in four disciplines (ESL, Mathematics, Reading and Speech).
•
During the fall 2009 and spring 2010 academic year, SI sessions were offered in 60
courses across 15 disciplines
disciplines. Disciplines added to previous offerings include
Administration of Justice, Applied Digital Media, Biology, Chemistry, History,
Microbiology and Welding. SGL sessions were offered in four disciplines (Biology,
Chemistry,
y, Mathematics and Physics).
y ) The SI p
program
g
expanded
p
to the Science
Technology Engineering and Math (STEM) and Career Technical Education (CTE)
Programs
Students Served - cont
•
Two thousand six hundred and twenty seven (2627) students participated in SI
program between Fall 2007 and Spring 2010 (duplicated head count). In the Fall
2007 SI program, 268 students participated. In the Spring 2008 SI Program, 248
students participated. In the Fall of 2008, 373 students participated. In the
Spring of 2009, 302 students participated. In the Fall of 2009, 561 students
participated. Finally, 875 students participated in the Spring of 2010 indicating
the program has quadrupled in size since is inception.
•
Five hundred and five students (505) participated in the SGL program between
the Spring 2008 and Spring 2010 semesters (duplicated head count). In the
Spring
p g 2008 SGL Program,
g
, 46 students participated.
p
p
If the Fall of 2008,, 155
students participated in SGL and in the Spring of 2009, 93 students participated
in SGL. In Fall of 2009, 91 students participated in the SGL program and by
Spring of 2010 the SGL program grew and served 120 students.
Demographics
– Age
g p
g
50.0%
45 5%
45.5%
45.0%
39.7%
40.0%
36.5%
33 6%
33.6%
35 0%
35.0%
34.9%
30.0%
25.2%
Year 1
25.0%
Year 2
Year 3
20.0%
15.0%
11.9%
11.2%
8.9%
8 9%
10.0%
5.0%
13.3%
12.8%
7.7%
6.0%
4.9%
3.7%
2.2%1.6%
0.4%
0.0%
Under 18
•
18-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
Over 35
In comparison to RCC 2009 data, SI/SGL serves a much younger student
population. RCC data shows 31% under 20 and 33% in 20
20--24 age group
Demographics
– Gender
g p
70%
62%
58%
60%
52%
48%
50%
41%
38%
40%
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
30%
20%
10%
1%
1%
1%
0%
Female
•
Male
Other
In comparison to RCC 2009 data, the gender composition of SI/SGL students is
similar to that of RCC students in general. RCC data show 41% male and 58%
male.
Demographics
– Ethnicity
g p
y
60%
53%
49%
50%
45%
40%
Year 1
30%
Year 2
18%19%
20%
Year 3
21%
15%15%
12%
10%
7%
11%
11%
9%
%
7%
9%
0%
Asian /Pac
Islander
•
African American
Hispanic
White
Other
In comparison to RCC 2009 data, SI/SGL serves a larger percentage of
African American and Hispanics students. RCC data shows 10% African
American and 37% Hispanics.
Guided Research Q
Question
1
1.
Does the Supplemental Instruction (SI) program impact student retention and
student success and/or academic growth?
2.
Is student success associated with the amount of time spent in SI sessions?
3.
– At “what point” does SI make a difference?
– If n (minutes) of SI is related to growth or success, then do students who
attain n minutes have an increase in terms of GPA?
Do the Study Group Leader (SGL) sessions impact student success and
retention?
Overall Success Rates
80.0%
70.5%
65.2%
70.0%
60 0%
60.0%
47.1%
50.0%
44.7%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
SI
Non-SI
SGL
Non-SGL
Note: Values significant p<.05 are indicated by *. The ChiChi-Square test was
used to determine the statistical significance.
Overall Retention Rates
100.0%
90.3%
%
89.6%
90.0%
75.1%
75.1%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
SI
Non-SI
SGL
Non-SGL
Overall – Mean # of hours and
R l ti
Relationship
hi to
t Success
S
Rate
R t
Success Subgroup
S
S b
N
Mean (hours)
F il
Failure
Subgroup
S b
N
Mean (Hours)
Year 1
465
4.7
232
2.9
Year 2
554
5.6
226
4.0
Year 3
1109
7.4
436
4.7
Overall, students who were successful in a course in terms of grade spent significant
more time in SI instructions.
• In Year 11, on average they spent 62 % more time SI session compared with those
who were not successful in terms of grade.
•In Year 2, on average they spent 40% more time SI session compared with those
who were not successful in terms of grade.
g
•In Year 3, , on average they spent 57 % more time SI session compared with those
who were not successful in terms of grade.
Success Rate +/
+//- 5 to 6 hours
90.0%
80.5%
78.7%
80.0%
75.8%
68.4%
70.0%
67.7%
63.7%
60.0%
51.3%
50.0%
50.0%
45.7%
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
5 > SI
< than 5 SI
Non-SI
Average
g GPA
Term
SI + 6 hours
SI
Non-SI
Fall 2009
2.45
2.35
1.79
Spring 2010
2.54
2.45
2.04
• Difference of .66 in Fall 2009 from SI + 6 hrs. and Non-SI.
Non SI.
• Difference of .50 in Spring 2010 from SI + 6 hrs. and Non-SI.
CTE Success
Fall 2009
SI + 6 hours
SI
Non-SI
AUT
83%
83%
74%
FTV
95%
93%
70%
91%
39%
SI + 6 hours
SI
Non-SI
AUT
100%
71%
54%
FTV
100%
91%
71%
ADJ
83%
36%
18%
WEL
100%
84%
75%
ADM
100%
100%
61%
ADJ
Spring 2010
Future Data Collection and Analysis
y
• What is the impact of SI on the SI leader?
• Is there evidence that SI or SGL works best in
specific disciplines and/or academic levels
within a single discipline?
s tthere
e e a relationship
e t o s p bet
between
ee academic
c de c
• Is
growth (grades and level of responsibility) and
SI?
– L
Levell off responsibility
ibilit iincludes
l d (b
(butt is
i nott limited
li it d to)
t )
successful completion of assignments, clear
communication with the course instructor,
respectful behavior
behavior, timeliness and preparation for
class.
Questions?
For more information yyou mayy contact:
marilyn.martinez--flores@rcc.edu
marilyn.martinez
myung.koh@rcc.edu
myung koh@rcc edu
rebecca.moonstone@rcc.edu