First-Year Gatekeeper Courses: An Innovation and Evaluation Model for Student Success

Transcription

1 First-Year Gatekeeper Courses: An Innovation and Evaluation Model for Student Success Nancy C. Marcus & Sally J. Andrade International Conference on the First-Year Experience Honolulu July 12, 2001

2 PREMISE It is immoral to admit poorly prepared students into a survival of the fittest environment. If we admit them, we must help them succeed. The gateway course to success in science or engineering on our campus is Precalculus. This is where we took our stand. Our objective was to increase the number of students entering and passing Calculus. Figure 1

3 A NEW LOOK AT FIRST-SEMESTER PRECALCULUS If we changed the course delivery, would it make a difference? Could we be more user-friendly without watering down the course? Is it set in stone that each course is one-semester long? Would a variablelength course work? Is a student s grade always based on individual work? Could we include group work without inflating grades? Is Precalculus always a stand-alone course? Could we integrate with courses in other departments? What about developing a just-in-time Precalculus syllabus to accommodate science and engineering labs? Figure 2

4 MODULAR MODEL Initial Design Divide the course curriculum into four distinct parts. Students enter the course at various levels. Divide the semester into four distinct time intervals. All sections of the course are offered at the same time. Students have three tries to pass each of the parts. Students have up to three semesters to complete the course. Figure 3

5 MODULAR MODEL Initial Design (continued) Individual work and team work contribute to a student s grade. Integrate projects with science, engineering, and English. Part 4 is comprehensive. , pooled office hours, on-line tutorials and peer facilitators are part of the design. A comprehensive, longitudinal evaluation has been part of the design from the beginning. Figure 3a

6 INITIAL RESULTS Students continued to traditionally-taught second-semester Precalculus and then to Calculus, or students tested directly into Calculus from the reform course. Students who test directly into Calculus have a higher passing rate than students who enter calculus via second-semester Precalculus. Student teams are a tremendous success. Many teams stay together after the course ends. Its reorganized curriculum accommodates science and engineering courses. Figure 4

7 INITIAL RESULTS (continued) Students and faculty are tracked. Feedback and input are continuous. Peer facilitator program is a great success. Individuals from other departments became involved in the reform design. The Precalculus manual is on-line, and the SOS math-tutorial has won many world-wide awards and now has more than one million hits per year. Figure 4a

8 CURRENT DESIGN The two-semester, eight-hour Precalculus sequence is now a modular one-semester, five-hour course. Precalculus plays a major part in UTEP s Entering Student Program for science and engineering majors. All entering students are placed into clusters according to their ability in math and English. All Precalculus courses are linked to English and a core University Seminar course. Figure 5

9 CURRENT DESIGN (continued) Between-semester, on-line parts are now offered to Precalculus students who have not completed the course during the regular semester. Precalculus chat rooms and allow students to communicate with faculty, peer facilitators, and other students off-campus. Peer facilitators team with instructors in the classrooms and on the Internet. Figure 5a

10 Modular Precalculus Course Design Pass Pass Pass Pass fail fail fail F fail fail F 3 fail fail fail 3 3 F 4 fail fail fail 4 4 F fail Pass Course Figure 6

11 PRECALCULUS CURRICULUM REFORM Before Reform, fall 1993 first-time course-takers: Traditional curriculum: Two-semester, 8-hour sequence Traditional course format Pass rate (A, B, C) range: 45% Percentage of successful Precalculus students enrolling in Calculus: 34.5% Number and percentage passing Calculus: 47 (77%) Course Efficiency Index: 3.8 (1.0 is the ideal) Course Effectiveness Index:.66 Figure 7

12 PRECALCULUS CURRICULUM REFORM After Reform, fall 1998 first-time course-takers: Modular course format: One-semester, 5-hour sequence Reform curriculum Pass rate (A, B, C): 70% Percentage of Precalculus successful students enrolling in Calculus: 64.3% Number and percentage passing Calculus: 108 (66.7%) Course Efficiency Index: 2.3 (1.0 is the ideal) Course Effectiveness Index:.66 Figure 7a

13 ICING ON THE CAKE The program works. Pass rates and retention rates are up. This is relatively easy and inexpensive to implement. Change begets change. We have designed and implemented successful, nontraditional programs because we choose to look at an old problem through a different set of glasses. Figure 8

14 Performance in Calculus I over the Subsequent Two Years by Cohorts of First-Time Students Who Passed Precalculus Figure 9

15 COURSE EFFICIENCY: Did Students Survive the First Course of the Curricular Sequence? ICE Index* = the average number of attempts it takes a cohort of students to pass the gateway course the percent of first-time takers who pass the gateway course on the initial attempt the percent of all gateway course first-time takers who pass within the two-year period the percent of gateway course first-time takers who cannot complete the course within that period the total number and percent of successful outcomes ICE index: The closer to 1.0, the more efficient the course * developed by the University of Puerto Rico Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority Participation Figure 10

16 COURSE EFFECTIVENESS: Did Students Learn What They Need to Know in First Course of Curricular Sequence? ICE 2 Index = success rate on the first attempt to past the next course in the curricular sequence by those cohort students who passed the gateway course and enrolled in the next course Percent of first-time takers who passed the gateway course and enrolled in the next course in the curricular sequence: Whether capable students are continuing in the major as a result of the gateway course experience Percent of gateway course successful first-time takers who pass the next course in the curricular sequence on the initial attempt: Whether the gateway course prepares students with the knowledge and skills needed for the next course in the curricular sequence ICE 2 Index: The closer to 1.0, the more effective the course Total number of gateway course successful first-time takers who pass the next course within the two-year period: Potential pool of students for majors requiring the gateway course and the next course in the curricular sequence Figure 11

17 What Are the Indicators of a Successful Gateway Course? A Case Study of Persistence and Performance by First-Time Students PRECALCULUS: Enrollment in Fall Semester Number * 2000* *Incomplete analysis: lacks results for Summer 2001 semester Figure 12

18 PRECALCULUS: Passed on the First Attempt Percentage * 2000* *Incomplete analysis: lacks results for Summer 2001 semester Figure 13

19 PRECALCULUS: Total Who Passed in Two-Year Period Percentage * 2000* *Incomplete analysis: lacks results for Summer 2001 semester Figure 14

20 PRECALCULUS: The Pool for the Next Course in the Curricular Sequence Number * 2000* *Incomplete analysis: lacks results for Summer 2001 semester Figure 15

21 CALCULUS: Enrollment: Percentage of Successful Precalculus Students Percentage * 2000* *Incomplete analysis: lacks results for Summer 2001 semester Figure 16

22 CALCULUS: Percentage of Enrolled Precalculus Students Who Passed on the First Attempt Percentage * 2000* *Incomplete analysis: lacks results for Summer 2001 semester Figure 17

23 CALCULUS: Percentage of Total Enrolled Precalculus Students Who Passed in Two-Year Period Percentage * 2000* *Incomplete analysis: lacks results for Summer 2001 semester Figure 18

24 CALCULUS: The Pool of Potential Majors Number * 2000* *Incomplete analysis: lacks results for Summer 2001 semester Figure 19