Graduate Tutor(GT) Outcomes

Graduate Tutoring (GT) Outcomes Across terms, there were larger proportions of Asian students and Latinx students represented in GT course sections compared to course sections with no GT, whereas the opposite was true among White students.

Graduate Tutoring (GT) Outcomes GT Sections Compared to Non-GT Sections Across all terms, retention rates tended to be higher for students enrolled in GT sections than for students enrolled in sections without a GT for the same courses. Course GPAs also tended to be higher for students enrolled in GT sections than those who were not. This pattern held true for Latinx students*. *Note: This pattern was also found for African American students, but the samples were much smaller and thus, are not reported here.

Graduate Tutoring (GT) Outcomes GT Sections Compared to Non-GT Sections The same was found for success rates…. Across all terms, success rates tended to be higher for students enrolled in GT sections than for students enrolled in sections without a GT for the same courses. Again, this pattern held true for Latinx students*. *Note: This pattern was also found for African American students, but the samples were much smaller and thus, are not reported here.

Graduate Tutoring (GT) Outcomes Within GT Sections – Contacts with GT When looking within the GT course sections, retention rates tended to be higher for students enrolled in GT sections who had at least one out of class contact with the GT compared to those with no out of class contacts. Course GPAs also tended to be higher for students who had at least one out of class contact with a GT compared to those who did not. This pattern held true for Latinx students.

Graduate Tutoring (GT) Outcomes Within GT Sections – Contacts with GT Success rates also tended to be higher for students enrolled in GT sections who had at least one out of class contact with the GT compared to those with no out of class contacts. Once again, this pattern held true for Latinx students.

Classroom Tutor(CT) Outcomes

Classroom Tutoring (CT) Course SectionCount Enrollments Avg. Size ACCT116A 1 43 ANTH102 3 136 45.3 ASTR101 7 302 43.1 BIOL107 5 117 23.4 CHEM100 2 77 38.5 CHEM152 4 208 52 ENGL043 27 ENGL047A 165 23.6 ENGL049 26 ENGL101 ESOL045 25 FREN101 29 GEOG101 278 39.7 GEOL100 127 42.3 MATH046 40 MATH092 13 463 35.6 MATH096 8 324 40.5 MATH104 181 MATH116 6 247 41.2 MATH119 303 50.5 PSYC101 45 CT Program Information: Fall 2015-Fall 2017

Classroom Tutoring (CT) Overall Course success rates for courses with Embedded Classroom Tutor as compared to the same courses without a CT

Classroom Tutoring (CT) Overall success and retention rates for courses with Embedded Classroom Tutor based on the number of outside contacts students had with the CT

Classroom Tutoring (CT) Course GPA for courses with Embedded Classroom Tutor based on the number of outside contacts students had with the CT

Classroom Tutoring (CT) Outcomes for Sections with Embedded Classroom Tutors Ethnicity CT Use Enroll Success Rate Retention Rate GPA Avg. CT Visits Overall Used CT 1,025 77% 92% 2.69 6.3 Did not Use CT 2,255 62% 84% 2.31 African American 100 83% 2.27 6.1 170 52% 1.74 American Indian 4 100% 3.46 18.5 7 86% 3.00 Asian 87 97% 2.82 4.7 220 76% 90% Filipino 31 94% 2.91 6.5 58% 78% 2.26 Latinx 418 72% 89% 2.53 6.7 898 56% 82% 2.06 Other 42 64% 93% 2.36 7.1 135 60% 2.21 Pacific Islander 71% 2.35 2.4 11 45% 1.70 Unreported 16 69% 88% 5.4 38 95% 2.73 White 320 87% 96% 676 67% 85% 2.59

Classroom Tutoring (CT) Success Rate changes for each Ethnic Group in courses with Embedded Classroom Tutor based on whether students had outside contact with the CT (Used CT – Did not Use CT). Note: Only includes Ethnic groups with 10 or more students in both Groups (Used the CT, did not use the CT)

Classroom Tutoring (CT) % of students who accessed CT outside of classroom by Ethnicity compared to representation in the CT sections Students who accessed CT All Students in CT Sections

Classroom Tutoring (CT) Success Rate changes within each Subject with Embedded Classroom Tutor based on whether students had outside contact with the CT (Used CT – Did not Use CT).

Mesa Tutoring and Computing Centers (MT2C) Outcomes

MT2C Visitor Demographic (Fall 2017) No different ethnicity pattern was noted between students who visited Mesa Tutoring and Computer Centers (MT2C) and who did not visit MT2C.

MT2C Visitor Demographic (Fall 2017) No different gender pattern was noted between students who visited Mesa Tutoring and Computer Centers (MT2C) and who did not visit MT2C.

MT2C Visitor Demographic (Fall 2017) Students under 18 years of age, who mostly are dual enrolled at high schools and Mesa College visited MT2C less. In other age groups, only small differences in visiting pattern is noted.

MT2C Visitor Demographic (Fall 2017) Students who have an educational goal to obtain bachelor’s degree tend to visit MT2C more.

MT2C Visitor Demographic (Fall 2017) Continuing students and first-time students tend to visit MT2C more. Current high school students dually enrolled at Mesa visited MT2C less.

MT2C Visitor Demographic (Fall 2017) Students visited MT2C sites to get help on math and science courses, and writing the most in Fall 2017.

MT2C Visitor Outcomes (Fall 2017) Figure 7. Overall Retention and Success Rate Comparison Students who visited MT2C have better retention and success rate, and higher GPA.

MT2C Visitor Outcomes (Fall 2017) Figure 8. Retention and Success Rate Comparison by Gender Students who visited MT2C have consistently better course outcomes in retention, success and GPA

MT2C Outcomes (Fall 2017) Figure 9. Retention Rate Comparison by Ethnicity Students who visited MT2C have consistently higher retention rate.

MT2C Visitor Outcomes (Fall 2017) Figure 10. Success Rate Comparison by Ethnicity Students who visited MT2C have consistently higher course success rate.

MT2C Visitor Outcomes (Fall 2017) Figure 11. Mesa GPA Comparison by Ethnicity Students who visited MT2C have consistently higher Mesa GPA.

MT2C Visitor Outcomes (Fall 2017) Figure 12. Term GPA Comparison by Ethnicity Students who visited MT2C have consistently higher Term GPA.

MT2C Visitor Outcomes (Fall 2017) Figure 13. Cumulative SDCCD GPA Comparison by Ethnicity Students who visited MT2C have consistently higher Cumulative SDCCD GPA.

MT2C Visitor Outcomes (Fall 2017) Figure 14. Math Course Outcomes Comparison Students who visited MT2C have higher course outcomes in math.

MT2C Visitor Outcomes (Fall 2017) Figure 15. Math Course Outcomes Comparison by the Number of Visit The more students visited MT2C, the better course outcomes in retention and success rate is noted. GPA in general is aligned with the pattern with a slight variance.

MT2C Visitor Outcomes (Fall 2017) Figure 16. Math Course Retention Rate by Ethnicity Students who visited MT2C have consistently higher retention rate in Math courses.

MT2C Visitor Outcomes (Fall 2017) Figure 17. Math Course Success Rate by Ethnicity Students who visited MT2C have consistently higher success rate in Math courses.

MT2C Visitor Outcomes (Fall 2017) Figure 18. Math Course Mesa GPA by Ethnicity Students who visited MT2C have generally higher Mesa GPA except for African American and American Indian students.

MT2C Visitor Outcomes (Fall 2017) Figure 19. Math Course Term GPA by Ethnicity Students who visited MT2C have consistently higher Term GPA.

MT2C Visitor Outcomes (Fall 2017) Figure 20. Math Course Cumulative SDCCD GPA by Ethnicity Students who visited MT2C have consistently higher Cumulative SDCCD GPA.