Presented by:Dr. Yianni (John) Vassiliou

College Board, Forum 2011October 28th, 2011New York, NY

Dr. John Vassiliou Sixteen years experience Student & Academic Affairs , Learning Resources – Higher Education Nine years as an Adjunct Professor (College Success Skills) - Miami Dade College Director, Testing Department - MDC Director ,Computer Courtyard - Learning Resources Division - MDC’s Kendall Campus

(S.O.C.R.A.T.E.S. Tutoring Services & NSSM Lab) Coordinator of Title III Grant – “Strengthening Institution’s Program” Assessment Team Leader for Completion by Design Project – North Campus - MDC Member of MDC’s College Academic & Student Support Council (CASSC) Research & Testing

Committee Ph.D. - Higher Education Leadership at Florida Atlantic University

Member of :

American Educational Research Association (AERA) Association of the Study of Higher Education (ASHE) Association of Florida Colleges (AFC) Association of Colleges for Tutoring and Learning Assistance (ACTLA) College Board College Reading and Learning Association (CRLA) Commission on Adult Basic Education (COABE) Council for the Study of Community Colleges (CSCC) Florida Association of College Test Administrators (FACTA) National College Testing Association (NCTA) The Chair Academy Native of Greece

Enhance college-readiness

45 % or 6.8 million credit students enrolled annually in CCs (AACC, 2007)

60 % or 4,080.000 students of CC FTIC need remediation (AtD, 2006)

27 % completed remediation (cohort of 36,389 students /20 AtD

colleges ,2002)

867,308 in FL 2008-09 unduplicated headcount or 14 % (FLDOE ,2009)

70 % or 607,116 require remediation (OPAGA report, 2008)

Increase retention & graduation rates

45 % earn degrees and 41 % earn certificates within 6 years (NCES ,2003)

Today’s learners are non-traditional students (avg. age at CCs is 26 years)

adult learner (refresh basic skills)

individualized approach

Challenges in Higher Education

Analyzing Student Data - Feedback

MDC Institutional Research Survey 2008-09 vs. NCES 2006

Working while in college 72.0 % 79.0 % nationwide (NCES 2006)

Working FT 45.1 % 41.0 % nationwide (NCES 2006)

Caring for dependents 31.9 % 35.0 % nationwide (NCES 2006)

Lack of finances 52.0 % 45.0 % nationwide (Pell & Institutional Aid) 9.8 % Stafford Loans

Long commute to & from college weekly (6 or more hrs)35.5 %

Academically unprepared 25.2 %

In 2007 the SAIL Lab was no longer funded under Perkins guidelines 2007-08 budget - $492,000 2008-09 budget - $295,000 2009-10 budget - $102,000

SAIL Lab services still needed since: 75% MDC students are not college-ready 55% retake placement test

Created S.O.C.R.A.T.E.S. Tutoring Center – fee $95.00 Student Oriented Center for Retention & Advancement through Technology & Educational

Support

60 days access to software/individualized instruction (A+dvancer)

3 hrs tutoring (face-to-face and/or online) English Language Skills, Reading, and Mathematics

Historical Development of Tutoring Center

S.O.C.R.A.T.E.S. Tutoring ServicesProgram Marketing

Significance of the Study Examine:

multiple pre and post outcome measures for students in need of remedial instruction

comparative effectiveness of Computer-Assisted Instructional (CAI) method as an alternative to the traditional method of delivering remedial education in terms of student success and retention

consequences of a CAI to improve students’ performance in need of remedial instruction

Explore: innovative tutoring approaches (on-line tutoring & face-to-face) target student specific needs create individual lesson plans track student progress opportunities for funding resources through grants

Integrate research and data to enhance their decision-making process

Methodology Design:

Pre-post test, single group design collapsed across seven

semesters utilizing four ACCUPLACER® assessments:

two for mathematics (Arithmetic & Elementary Algebra)

two for language (Sentence Skills & Reading)

Dependent t-tests were used to test and assess acquisition

Chi-squares were utilized to measure:

retention rates (defined by enrollment in the next class

following the computer-assisted instruction)

success rates (defined by receiving a passing grade)

completion rates (defined by completing the highest level of

remedial education)

Participants 312 students responded

222 students met the cut-off criteria

180 students were included in the final analysis

some of them participated in more than one content area

ACCUPLACER® cut scores used:

arithmetic scores below 30

elementary algebra scores below 72

reading & sentence skills scores below 83

Student participants worked with the A+dvancer® software at

least 90 minutes on their own uniquely prescribed series of

individualized lessons at a self directed pace

Demographics Total

Participants/Completers 180 students

Total Subject Areas of Intervention 216 subject areas

Gender Distribution Females: 55% Males: 45%

Age Range 18 – 53 years old Average age Study: 24 years old Average age – CC : 26 years old

Citizenship Status US Citizens: 70% Non-US Citizens: 30%

Ethnic Background 77% Hispanic 23% Non-Hispanic

Time Spend per Subject Area Arithmetic: 9 hrs Algebra: 9 hrs & 40 m. Sentence Skills: 13 hrs Reading: 5 hrs & 34 m.

Online Student Support Services

Program & Support Services Orientation (online format) Web-enhanced courses via Angel LMS Online Student Support Center Individualized Learning Approach (A+dvancer) Tutoring

face-to-face (MDC Tutors) Online (MDC and Smarthinking Tutors – both use same tutoring platform) Assisting with FACTS.org website Academic Advisement & Study Plan (individual IEP) Assistance with FAFSA online form Study Skills Resources Learning Styles, Personalities & Multiple Intelligences Inventories Time Management & Finance Management Quiz “Course” Progress / Grade book (% of A+dvancer lessons completed weekly) Electronic Student Satisfaction Survey

Data collection by tracking participants’: Success rates Retention rates Degree completion rates within 3 years

Data reporting to MDC administrators and Federal Government (DoE – Title III)

Service Excellence – services in blue were added after initial implementation of the program

Program Online Orientation

Lesson Plan and Expectations

Online Student Support Center

Online Student Resources

Online Student Support Center Content

Online Tutoring

Tracking Progress

Study Findings – Reading/Sentence Skills

Improved Reading Score 44 of 57 77 %

Time Spend : 5 hrs & 34 min

Net Gain + 9.51

------------------------------------

Improved Sentence Skills Score

21 of 27 78 %

Time Spend : 13 hrs

Net Gain + 8.54

Study Findings – Arithmetic/Algebra

Improved Arithmetic Score

61 of 69 88 %

Time Spend: 9 hrs

Net Gain + 19.75

-------------------------------------

Improved Algebra Score 55 of 63 87 %

Time Spend : 9 hrs & 40 min

Net Gain + 20.49

CAI participants increased ACCUPLACER® mean scores

Significant within-group results were found for the increase in

participant ACCUPLACER® mean score performances for all four

content areas:

Sentence Skills mean scores increased significantly by 8.54 points:

t (25) = 3.413, (p = .002)

Reading mean scores increased significantly by 9.51 points:

t (56) = 5.338, (p < .001)

Elementary Algebra mean scores increased significantly by 20.49 points:

t (62) = 8.236, (p < .001)

Arithmetic mean scores also increased significantly by 19.75 points:

t (68) = 7.939, (p < .001)

Post-Assessment Findings / 90 min or more in A+

180 of 216 improved placement test scores 83.4 %

136 of 216 place into the higher level - Post-test 63.0 %

Post-Assesement Placement 62 of 136 placed into College Level 45.6 %

74 of 136 placed into higher College Prep Level 54.4 %

Post-Assistance Course Progression

171 of 216 (79.2 %) enrolled

153 of 171 (89.5 %) passed course

10 of 171 (6 %) did not pass course

8 of 171 (5 %) withdrew from course

45 of 216 (20.8 %) did not enroll in any course

Math Course Progression

Retention & Success (next course) CAI vs. Traditional College-Prep

Percentage rate of CAI participants who advanced a level (passed initial course) was higher than for students who utilized traditional instruction

Number of CAI participants who advanced a level was not statistically significant (p =.30)

Retention and success rates of CAI participants who advanced a level and enrolled in the next level class (see Chart below) were significantly better (p <.001)

Findings Statistically significant improvement was found for:

Increased ACCUPLACER® scores for CAI students

Number of CAI students who avoided at least one remedial course

Number of CAI students who avoided remediation

CAI students who enrolled in the next level coursework

CAI students who passed the next course

Results strongly suggest that employment of the relatively inexpensive CAI approach in the form of A+dvancer College Readiness Online for a comparatively short period of time produces a significant increase in the performance of CAI students in need of remedial instruction.

Why A+dvancer ?Online software provides 24/7 access anytime, anywhere learning great reporting capabilities

Prescriptive Skills Diagnostic Assessment aligned with college-readiness proficiencies P.E.R.T. ACCUPLACER COMPASS

Individually Prescribed Instruction designed to meet student specific learning needs system assigns automatically individualized lesson sequence refreshes essential skills for college success ensures student’s engagement with assigned lessons each lessons within a content area has a post-test & a mastery

test to ensure mastery of skills

Implications for Further Research, Policy, and/or Practice

Success of CAI participants compared to the success of more traditionally instructed college-prep students on measures as: college-level coursework drop-out rates time to degree completion actual graduation rates

would provide further insight into any lasting differences between the two instructional modalities.

Efficacy differences between traditional instruction and CAI for language acquisition for the growing number of ESL students.

Other designs could consider efficacy CAI outcomes arising from:

socioeconomic status (SES) high school GPA GED students

CAI Benefits Flexible instructional approach, could be offered to non-traditional

students

Significant improvements in remedial skills were made following a

relatively brief intervention, ranging from about 6 to 13 hours per

student over a period of 60 days or less, which is especially

encouraging.

Does not require instructors’ assistance or physical space on

campus

Allows institutions to allocate resources in other areas of need

while providing remedial education to students in efficient and

effective ways

Institutions will be able to serve effectively a greater number of

students with different learning styles and different academic

skills by mobilizing multiple instructional modalities

And .…. We Kept Going !!!!!!

Connecting Socially

Service Excellence – Test Preparation

Once the passing score is obtained, student may

automatically proceed to the end of program survey

link: https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dHM4a1lOam1CQWkwRU1ram9FWldRMkE6MA

Seeking Feedback

Detecting Warning Signs Early

Focusing on Individual Needs

Student Data Base

Title III, Title IV, and Title V (U.S. Dept. of Education) projects addressing Developmental Education

Title III Strengthen Institutions with large numbers of economically

disadvantaged students Funded under various reauthorizations of the Higher

Education Act of 1965

Title IV provide funds for Talent Search, Upward Bound, Student

Support Services, and TRIO Programs

Title V

funds to support Hispanic-serving institutions

funded under HEA of 1965

Federal Grants

Title III Grant AwardUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

OFFICE OF LEGISLATION AND CONGRESSIONAL AFFAIRS07/01/2009

The Honorable Lincoln Diaz-BalartU.S. House of RepresentativesWashington, DC 20515

Dear Representative Diaz-Balart:

I am pleased to inform you that MIAMI DADE COLLEGE, KENDALL CAMPUS has been selected toreceive funding under the STRENGTHENING INSTITUTIONS PROGRAM (031A). This grant will be in theamount of $314,333.00 for the period 10/01/2009 through 09/30/2010. It is anticipated that the grant will befor a total of 5 year(s). Accompanying this letter you will find both an explanation of the purpose of theSTRENGTHENING INSTITUTIONS PROGRAM and a brief description of the activities that will be fundedunder the grant to MIAMI DADE COLLEGE, KENDALL CAMPUS.

The grantee will be notified officially of their selection by the Department in the next few days. Please feelfree to share this information with the grantee and others as you see fit. I hope you find this information useful. If the Office of Legislation and Congressional Affairs can provide any further information in this regard or assistance in any other matter, please do not hesitate to contact me or my staff at (202) 401-1028.

Sincerely,Gabriella GomezAssistant Secretary,Office of Legislation and Congressional AffairsReference Grant Award Number: #P031A090128FLORIDA - 21

Innovation Grants for CCsFund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE)

Grants for ABE via Workforce Investment Act (1988) and U. S. Department of Labor

State and/or local Philanthropic Foundationsvia web search and foundation directories less competition because they are not widely known - funds for special projects and innovations

Local Business and Industry grantsfunding for activities designed to improve educational opportunities in a state or region

Small Grants ($500 - $2,500) – from local business, 2 – 3 pages describing the need for funds, what we seek to accomplish, and how it will benefit the community

Other Types of Grants

Dr. Yianni (John) VassiliouDirector, Testing Department

Student Affairs DivisionMiami Dade College

West CampusPhone: (305) 237-8536Email: jvassili@mdc.edu