History 27 Supplemental Instruction Final Report
Area of Inquiry: Does supplemental instruction led by the course instructor improve student success and/or persistence?
As the History 27 (U. S. Women’s History) Semester Comparison Chart below illustrates, the withdrawal rate for this course from Fall 2006-Spring 2008 averaged 25%. There was a big jump in withdrawals to 35% in Fall 2008, which indicated the need for some type of instructional intervention. I received BSI funding for Spring and Fall 2009 to support weekly workshops for my History 27 students that met outside of class. Students received a few extra-credit points for attendance. Data from Spring 2009 shows the withdrawal rate dropping below 20% for the first time in years. Approximately 28% of History 27 students attended on a regular basis, with more than 50% attending at least one or more sessions in Spring 2009. Student persistence greatly improved from the previous semester (from 9.6% to 21.9%). Student success improved by 3.8% from the previous semester, which was a bit disappointing as I had expected much greater improvement. This seemed like very little return for all of the time and effort I put into the workshops.
For Fall 2009, 30% of my students were regular attendees. Eighty- seven students took the first midterm in mid-September, and eighty-five took the second midterm in mid-October. My retention numbers have never been so high. I was completely blown away by my success rate at the end of the semester, which was a whopping 70.9%!! The withdrawal rate was the lowest it had been in years at 13.9%. I must add that this was the first semester that I had fully integrated Reading Apprenticeship metacognative routines into my pedagogy. I believe that this did impact my success and retention rates in a positive way along with the workshops,
In Spring 2010 I did not offer supplemental workshops, but continued integrating RA routines into my teaching. The success rate remained very high at 69%, but my withdrawal rate shot back up to 24% by semester’s end.
Discoveries to Date
The supplemental instruction workshops greatly impacted student persistence. Withdrawal rates for both semesters that workshops were offered dipped below 20%. The workshops allowed more contact between students, and I found that many strong students attended and helped some of the weaker ones. The smaller group setting allowed me to address questions that many were hesitant to ask in the larger class setting. I also had the opportunity of to show students how to do tasks such as compare/contrast, how to cite multiple sources, reading between the lines of text, etc. I kept detailed workshop tutoring logs that appear after the comparison chart below to show the kinds of things we did on a week-to-week basis.
Analyzing the success numbers is a bit trickier. I saw just a slight improvement for Spring, but a huge improvement for Fall. The success numbers remained high in Spring 2010, even though no workshops were offered. I’m not really sure what these numbers reveal about the relationship between the workshops and student success, only that for both semesters the success numbers improved.
Future Applications
I will offer the workshop as a one-unit CR/NC course in Fall 2010 as General Studies 4915. While the workshop content will remain the same, this is different from previous semesters. Students will enroll and attend on a weekly basis for credit. Our students already have impacted school/work schedules, and I don’t know if this will draw enough students to merit a slot on the schedule. If students don’t/won’t take the time to enroll and attend, it will be difficult to make the case to keep this course in the curriculum. I plan to offer this course in Fall and Spring, and then determine its future based on enrollment.
I have received funding from Title III/BSI to offer workshops for my two History 7 sections for Fall 2010. As with History 27, these workshops will be held outside of class on a weekly basis with students receiving a few points of extra-credit for attendance. I hope to receive funding to continue these workshops for Spring 2011 so that I can collect and analyze data on the impact of supplemental instruction on History 7 student success/persistence rates.
History 27 Semester Comparison Chart
History 27 Workshop Attendance/Activity Log for Spring 2009
Week 1: Taking Notes & Study Skills (13 students for week)
Tuesday, January 27, 2009 (9 students)
In attendance: Wendy Avery, Bryner Banks, Marvin Costa, Carrie Decker, Denise Everett, Briana Kramer, JazminPalega, Shannon Redmond, LaSonja Zeigler
Distributed handout on taking notes. Integrated handout points into discussion of class material covered earlier that day. Angela supplemented my suggestions with organizational tips and stressed the importance of consistent course material review. Students were very responsive to questions about their own study skills and strategies that have helped them in the past. One student suggested study groups arranged in class for those students who benefit from collaborative learning. I will bring this up my classes to gage interest.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009 (4 students)
In attendance: Marissa Navarrete, Jennifer Shirkhani, Debra Webb-Reddick, Sheila Young-Loughran
Repeat of yesterday’s session. This group was more open and seemed to feel more comfortable with the small-group setting than yesterday’s group. We had a brief discussion on aging in American culture and how age is viewed very differently in the indigenous cultures of North America. This ties in to one of the themes in our course reading. Angela’s tips on how to organize and manage the course material were very well received by this group.
Week 2: Test-taking Skills (24 students for week)
Tuesday, February 3, 2009 (11 students)
In attendance: Janette Avila, Rocio Chavez, Marvin Costa, Carrie Decker, Denise Everett, Amanda Lobato, Sharmoneke Lott, JazminPalega, Shannon Redmond, Malinalli Sanchez, LaSonja Zeigler.
Session focused on test-taking skills. Distributed practice quizzes on material covered in class. Students could use notes and handouts. Exercise designed to reinforce the importance of taking notes, annotating handouts, and organizing class material. Students were given fifteen minutes to complete the quiz. Students shared their answers, and how they arrived at each answer. The last fifteen minutes focused on multiple-choice testing skills. Students read each question on an overhead transparency and wrote down the letter that they thought was correct. Students shared how they arrived at their answers. We finished three out of five questions, and students expressed that they want to finish the other two questions next week. After students left Angela commented on how helpful this exercise is, especially at the beginning of the semester. We engaged in some metacognative conversation!
Wednesday, February 4, 2009 (13 students)
In attendance: LizbethGonsalez, Mia Martinez, SaharMeher, Shantel Reyes, Angie Saechao-Perez, Cheryl Sandhu, Jennifer Shirkhani, Antoinette Stroughter, John Szwed, Lisa Tran, Shevette Washington, Debra Webb-Reddick, Shelia Young.
Repeat of yesterday’s session. We completed all five of the multiple-choice questions instead of just the first three.
Week 3: Comparison/Contrast of European Witch-burnings & Salem Witch-hunt in preparation for midterm essay exam (17 students for week)
Tuesday, February 10, 2009 (12 students)
In attendance: Janette Avila, Christina Castillo, Adalanica Chavez, Marvin Costa, Denise Everett, Maria Garcia, Marissa Navarrete, JazminPalega, Zuleyma Perez, Shannon Redmond, Malinalli Sanchez, Lisa Tran.
Session focused on European Witch-Burnings and Salem Witch-Hunt Comparison/Contrast Worksheet. We pulled out topics from the Salem reading and compared/contrasted them with the video sheet information on the European Witch-Burnings. I was amazed at the richness of the discussion. Students were pulling out so many relevant topics, some that I had not come up with. This discussion would have been so beneficial to the class as a whole, but time constraints only allowed us to do two topics in class and the rest is their responsibility to complete as homework. Based on the success of these first three workshops, I am strongly considering adding a lab hour to the class. A lab hour would allow me the freedom to do this type of exercise in much greater depth and reach all students, not just those who voluntarily come to the workshops.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009 (5 students)
In attendance: Shantel Reyes, John Szwed, Marcella Vega, Shevette Washington, Debra Webb-Reddick
Repeat of yesterday’s session with a much smaller (and less vocal) group. Students did offer insights, but were much less confident in their answers. I did ask them if they found the exercise helpful and their responses were very positive.
Week 4: QAR instruction & application for reading primary source material (22 students for week)
Tuesday, February 17, 2009 (16 students)
In attendance: Wendy Avery, Tanzania Cole, Marvin Costa, Michelle Currie, Carrie Decker, Denise Everett, Maria Garcia, Rita Gonzalez, Amanda Lobato, Sharmoneke Lott, JazminPalega, Zuleyma Perez, Malinalli Sanchez, Marcella Vega, Rachel Westergard, LaSonja Zeigler
We reviewed topics for comparison/contrast essay. Did the RA QAR exercise using the handout on David being late for school. Students answered the questions and then I identified the four different types of questions. Spent most of our time reading and discussing Chapter 5 of Harriet Jacobs’ slave narrative, using the QAR method. I had given them some questions on the reading last week in class and we identified the question types and discussed the answers. We didn’t get all the way through the reading, but they told me that the QAR method is helpful in making sense of difficult text.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009 (6 students)
In attendance: Lizbeth Gonzalez, Shannon Redmond, John Szwed, Lisa Tran, Sheila Young, Debra Webb-Reddick
Repeat of yesterday’s session. Smaller group but a few students were very vocal. Productive session.
Week 5: Quiz Bowl Contest with review questions for Midterm #1 (27 students for week
Tuesday, February 24, 2009 (15 students)
In attendance: Amber Carija, Adanelica Chavez, Rocio Chavez, Maria Garcia, Rita Gonzalez, Isabel Hernandez, Amanda Lobato, Zuleyma Perez, Andrea Pierce, Shannon Redmond (winner), Kristina Ruiz, Malinalli Sanchez (winner), FaridSiddiqi (winner), Phien Vo (winner), LaSonja Zeigler (winner).
Broke students into four teams. Each team gave itself a name and had a buzzer. I read questions from lectures, readings and two videos, all information for Midterm #1. Once a team buzzed in they were given a short time to discuss the answer. One point was given for each correct answer, and a one-point deduction for each incorrect answer. The winning team was awarded two more extra-credit points in addition to the two points given for participation, plus a women’s history pencil (for good luck on the multiple-choice portion of the exam.) The players weren’t very animated, which was a surprise to me although they seemed to benefit from the review.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009 (12 students)
In attendance: Wendy Avery (winner), Alexandra Hayman, Lizbeth Gonzalez (winner), Lindsay Jones (winner), Briana Kramer (winner), Shantel Reyes, KeylaSantizo, John Szwed, Marcella Vega, Shevette Washington, Debra Webb-Reddick, Sheila Young.
Another quiz bowl session, but much more animated and fun. I loved this group!
Week 6: Workshops cancelled for March 2 and March 4
Students just took first midterm, and this material does not appear on any other exams. Workshops will resume next week when we have relevant material to use in our sessions.
Week 7: Reading for comprehension & critical analysis: Declaration of Sentiments (23 students for week)
Tuesday, March 10, 2009 (12 students)
In attendance: Janette Avila, Bryner Banks, Adanelica Chavez, Michelle Currie, Carrie Decker, Maria Garcia, Rita Gonzalez, Amanda Lobato, MahaMojaddidi, Shannon Redmond, Malinalli Sanchez, LaSonja Zeigler
We continued working on a worksheet distributed in class. We read through the Declaration of Sentiments, and deciphered and wrote down the meaning of the introductory paragraphs, list of sentiments, and concluding paragraphs in words that are more accessible to 21st century Americans. We then discussed questions that are attached to the worksheet that ask students to work more closely with the text to relate the author’s issues with today’s feminist agenda. By the session’s end, I think that most of the students really understood the relevance of the document to their own lives. They will be quizzed on the document next week in class.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009 (11 students)
In attendance: Wendy Avery, Elizabeth Gabriel, Lizbeth Gonzalez, Danica Pagan, Shantel Reyes, John Szwed, Lisa Tran, Marciella Vega, Shevette Washington, Debra Webb-Reddick, Sheila Young
Repeat of yesterday’s session.
Week 8: Reading for comprehension and critical analysis: Mary Richardson Walker article (20 students for week)
Tuesday, March 17, 2009 (12 students)
In attendance: Janette Avila, Adanelica Chavez, Rocio Chavez, Michelle Currie, Maria Garcia, Briana Kramer, Amanda Lobato, Sharmoneke Lott, MahaMojadiddi, Shannon Redmond, Lisa Tran, LaSonja Zeigler.
We began reading and critically analyzing a reading distributed today in class on one of the first Euro-American women to cross the Plains and settle in Oregon Territory. They will write their second in-class essay on this article. The main question I ask them is to use evidence from the article to show how Mary conformed/did not conform to the 19th century female ideal of “true womanhood.” We discussed certain passages, and then connected them to the ideal. I gave them a worksheet to map out each of the four virtues of “true womanhood” and we wrote down evidence that pertained to relevant virtues. We got through about one third of the article, and will continue with this exercise next week.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 (8 students)
In attendance: Wendy Avery, Ashley Deane, Lizbeth Gonzalez, Lindsay Jones, Shantel Reyes, Shevette Washington, Debra Webb-Reddick, Sheila Young
Repeat of yesterday’s session. Group was more talkative, and Briana Kramer (who attended yesterday’s session) sat in because she wanted to discuss the article further. She had read through it and came up with some great insights. Although this was purely spontaneous, it was a great example of “student modeling,” because students were jotting down her ideas and asking questions. A great session!
Week 9: Reading for comprehension and critical analysis: continuation of Mary Richardson Walker article (22 students for week)
Tuesday, March 24, 2009 (11 students)
In attendance: Amber Carija, Adanelica Chavez, Rocio Chavez, Maria Garcia, Rita Gonzalez, Isabel Hernandez, Amanda Lobato, Andrea Pierce, FaridSiddiqi, Rachel Westergard, Lasonja Zeigler
Continuation of last week’s session topic, but group was not very responsive.
Attentive but not responsive. I kept asking questions but students didn’t really engage in any discussion about any of the passages or content. I’m a bit puzzled by this. Will see how tomorrow goes.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009 (11 students)
In attendance: Ashley Deane, Lizbeth Gonzalez, Allison Maloney, SaharMeher, Shantel Reyes, Cheryl Sandhu, Lisa Tran, Marcella Vega, Shevette Washington, Debra Webb-Reddick, Sheila Young
Same topic, same response as yesterday. After the session I had a lengthy chat with Angela and one of my brightest students this semester (who attended this session.) We brainstormed ideas to improve student engagement and response. I like what we came up with. Next semester I will break the students into groups and assign each group a certain section of the reading. They will do the mapping for their section and share it with the larger group. I have to refine this a bit, but I think it will work better than me working through the whole text with the wholegroup.
Week 10: Quiz Bowl Review for Midterm #2 (only held one workshop on Tuesday, cancelled Wednesday’s workshop because it would be held after midterm exam had been taken) (11 students for week)
Tuesday, March 31, 2009 (11 students)
In attendance: Maria Garcia (winner), Lizbeth Gonzalez (winner), Rita Gonzalez, Lindsay Jones, Ana Martinez (winner), Shannon Redmond, Shantel Reyes, FaridSiddiqi, John Szwed, Lily Vo, Debra Webb-Reddick
Great quiz bowl session!
Week 11: Workshops cancelled for April 14 & 15
Students just took second midterm, and this material does not appear on any other exams. Workshops will resume next week when we have relevant material to use in our sessions.
Week 12: Textbook primary source readings on women in the industrial workforce (16 students for week)
Tuesday, April 21, 2009 (8 students)
In attendance: Amber Carija, Adanelica Chavez, Carrie Decker, Maria Garcia, Rita Gonzalez, Shannon Redmond, Lisa Tran, LaSonja Zeigler