Early Warning System for Student Retention in Engineering

1
Early Warning System for Student Retention in
Engineering

• A work in progress.
• Tony Moore
• Department of Electrical Computer Engineering
• Iowa State University
• October 19, 2007
• NACADA National Conference, Baltimore, MD

2
Early Warning System Objectives

• Improve Retention of Students
• Positive Impact On Student Success
• Enhance Learning In Classroom
• Increase Recruitment

3
Why Have An EWS?

• Retention
• Retention and recruitment (affect of retention)
  numbers may increase with an Early Warning
  System. ACT statistics show that this type of
  system, when utilized properly, has a significant
  impact on retention vs. similar programs. ACT,
  Inc. (2004). What Works in Student Retention?
  (Research Report). Iowa City, IA W.R. Habley and
  R. McClanahan.
• Connection
• The strongest indicator of retention is the
  degree of connection to peers and faculty that a
  student makes. Astin, A. W. (1984). Student
  involvement A developmental theory for higher
  education. Journal of College Student Personnel,
  25, 134-134.

4
Noel LevitzFundamental Retention Theory

• Students who successfully integrate into the
  college community tend to persist (Bean,1980).
• Persistence is a function of the match between an
  individuals motivation and academic ability and
  his/her academic and social characteristics
  (Cabrera, Castaneda, Nora,Hengstler, 1992).
• A students tendency to drop out of college is
  inversely related to the degree of direct
  involvement in the academic and social life of
  the institution (Astin, 1984).
• The strongest indicator of retention is the
  degree of connection to peers and faculty that a
  student makes (Astin, 1984).

5
ACT PROGRAMS WITH THE GREATEST IMPACT ON
RETENTIONALL SURVEY COLLEGES
Source http//www.act.org/path/postsec/droptables
/pdf/AllColleges.pdf
6
What We Did

• Partnered with Engineering College IT Services
• Communication
• Shared Effort
• Credit given to Mary Goodwin and Bing Du for
  development of system, support, and process at
  Iowa State University.

7
What We Did cont

• Identified Key Classes
• Retention Concern in Math Chemistry
• Most First Year Students in Problem Solving
  Course
• Core ECpE Classes

8
What We Did cont

• Developed Easy-to-use Communication System
• Web Resource with Automated E-mail Alert
• From Instructor
• To Student Advisor
• Directions for Instructors

9
Sample Web Display

• To display students and their advisor, select
  course and section, and click the submit button.
• DEPT E E
• Course Section

101 185 201 303
1 2 3 A1 A2
submit
reset
10
Sample Web Display cont..

• Select student(s) from class list below, and then
  click the compose message button.
• COURSE E E 185
• Class List

Danny Cast John Doe Janice Doe Talia Door Bill
Dud Felicia Flint William Force
Compose email
reset
11
(No Transcript)
12
What We Did cont

• Advising Appointments
• Discussed concerns
• Identified strategies for success
• Explored resources available
• Follow-up

13
What We Learned About Students

• 60 Students Received Notices
• 59 Students Met w/ Advisor
• Students Used Academic Resource As Result of
  Meeting
• 13 Students Dropped Course(s) and/or Changed
  Major to Non-Engineering Curriculum

14
What We Learned About The EWS

• Test for Technical Problems
• Flexible Non-dependant on individual
• Develop well in advance
• Website links working
• User friendly login

15
What We Learned About The EWS cont

• Survey Faculty for Issues or Concerns on Use of
  System
• Grading done by week 4-6
• Knowledge of students by week 4-6
• User friendly
• Better than current process

16
What We Learned About The EWS cont

• Need a ECpE Department Champion of the System
• Time and effort needed
• Excellent communication skills
• Passionate about student success
• Ability to develop rapport

17
What We Are Doing Different

• Focus on Calculus I, Engr. Chemistry, Engr.
  Problem Solving
• Targeted sections
• Manageable amount to be successful
• Planning for future (better prepare for use of
  previous system)

18
What We Are Doing Different cont

• Initiate Face-to-Face Meeting With Instructor
• Develop rapport
• Listen to ideas to personalize system
• Address concerns
• Gather syllabi

19
Assessment ECpE Quantitative Data (F06)
Alert and intervention beyond week 6 of semester
20
Assessment ECPE Quantitative Data at
Midterm(F07)
21
Assessment Qualitative

• Interviews with Students
• Surveys with Students
• Anecdotes from Instructors
• Anecdotes from Advisors

22
Instructor Anecdotes

• This is a good idea. However, it is not easy
  for us to identify who the Electrical Computer
  Engineering majors are in these courses. (Chem)
• I have this already done in a way or two. This
  sounds good so I can help with that and I bet
  this situation would help me as well. (Problem
  Solving)
• I cannot even login.  This does not work with my
  regular password. (Circuits)

23
Advisor Anecdotes

• My workload has not increased in my assessment.
  I would most likely see these students and spend
  time contacting them later in the semester.
  Better to address the issues now.
• I would like to see a mandatory advising
  appointment in week 4 of each semester. I think
  this would be more effective than an email
  alert.

24
Student Surveys

• Orientation Self-Assessment
• Classroom behavior questions
• Educational motivation questions
• Week 3 and Week 13

25
Student Surveys cont..

• Predictions for Week 13?

26
Student Interviews

• Academic Intervention Self-Assessment
• Identify obstacles
• Plan of action

27
Questions Comments?