1 Students on Probation Deserve Our Help Too! Esau Tovar, M.S. Director, Assessment Center/Retention Counselor Santa Monica College Merril A. Simon, Ph.D., NCCC, RPC Assistant Professor, College of Education California State University, Northridge Student Support and Instructional Services Conference Emerging Student Needs: The Synthesis of the Online and Onsite Environments California Virtual Campus San Diego, CA May 8-9, 2003

2 Presentation Abstract This program will share the results of a series of interventions with a large sample of diverse, urban, community college students on probation after their first term. These interventions were designed to promote a return to success these students through re-orientation in small groups, the use of the College Student Inventory (Stratil, 2000), and developmental advisement. This study, conducted at a large, diverse, urban community college was undertaken to address the counseling and educational needs of the growing number of probationary students.

3 Rationale for Program 35% of all first-time students are on probation at the end of their first term % success rate for first semester students based on ethnic breakdown) Persistence rate of 54% from semester one to semester two. Commitment by institution to successfully serve students.

4 Factors Underlying High Probationary Rates Initial orientation to college does not meet students’ needs Lack of social and/or academic integration Delayed or flawed educational planning and undefined career goals. Need for intrusive advisement and mandatory assessment Delayed completion of math and English courses needed for success in other courses

5 Funding Support Provided by: Santa Monica College Fund for Instructional Improvement Grant, California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office

6 Counseling Faculty Training Developmental, intrusive advisement strategies. Using ‘flashpoints’ (Hirsch, 2001) Student involvement and I-E-O Model ( Astin, 1993 ) Retention strategies ( Basham & Lunenburg, 1998) Social & academic integration (Tinto, 1993 ) Training on the administration and interpretation of the College Student Inventory ( Stratil, 1988 )

7 Probationary Student “Re-Orientation” Researched existing programs for probationary students—in community colleges and four-year institutions Intended to address the specific needs of continuing students Discussed topics including commitment to college, motivation to succeed, understanding of institutional expectations, balancing, school, work and personal commitments; and connecting with faculty members and peers (social and academic integration)

8 Demographic Survey Included: Distance of SMC from home Parents’/Guardians’ educational level of attainment Hours employed per week Location: On- or Off- campus Hours studied per week High school GPA (approximate) Student’s reason for probation Strategies for overcoming probation

9 Participant Invitations All students who had enrolled for the first time in Fall 2002 and were now on academic or progress probation (~1,100) were mailed invitation letter with follow-up phone call reminders to those who didn’t respond. 323 students participated Small group intervention 10 to 15 students/group, 20 groups

10 Re-Orientation Beginning Introductions: Brief introduction of counselor and student worker Overview of Orientation and Purpose of SSP: Counselor explained the purpose and the history of SSP Counselor presented an overview of orientation Discussed ‘What is Probation’ handout Assessment Center: Reminded students to complete the math and/or English assessment if they had not already taken it. Briefly discussed the importance of assessing math & English placement to be successful in their other classes.

11 Icebreaker Exercise Gave students five minutes to write down a response to one of the following two questions: What was your biggest adjustment in starting college? What is something important thing you have learned about yourself since starting college? Asked for volunteers from the group to share their responses.

12 Re-Orientation Discussion Questions (1 of 2) 1.How many people have jobs? For those of you who do work, how does working affect your academic and social experience at SMC? 2.If you found yourself having trouble keeping up in class this coming semester, what would be the most effective method of improving your situation? Why would you choose this method? What has worked in the past? What has not worked in the past? -- Distributed Math and English Tutoring Schedule 3.Each semester, about 3,500 new students are placed on probation. What factors will those students need to address to become successful in college? -- Distributed ‘Calculating Your GPA’ handout

13 Re-Orientation Discussion Questions (2 of 2) 4. What does time management mean to you? How do you manage your time so that you can study enough hours each week? (If relevant, distributed Time Management handouts) 5. Have your instructors or counselors talked with you about effective study skills? What study skills would you recommend to others in your group? (If relevant, distributed Study Skills handouts) 6. Research has shown that college students face many personal obstacles while working to achieve their academic goals. How do you deal with personal obstacles so that they do not impede your progress towards your goals?

14 College Student Inventory All students were asked to complete the assessment—and all but two did. Version B—100 items. Assesses academic motivation, coping ability, and receptivity to support services. Provides a general overview of student’s likelihood to dropout and experience academic difficulty. Takes approximately 30 minutes to complete. Student and counselor discuss results in a subsequent appointment.

15 CSI cont. Norms for the CSI are available for four-year, and two-year colleges. Results include profiles for advisors and profiles for students with suggested interventions. Sample reports: df df Also available is a full-length version (A—164 items). May be completed online or sent in for processing.

16 Completion of Re-Orientation Process Orientation Evaluation Students completed evaluation and answered final demographic question (“Based on what you learned here today, what do you plan to do differently next term?”) when they finished their assessment. Encouraged students to make an appointment to speak with an SSP counselor during the winter inter-session to solidify goals.

17 Financial Aid Information  Answered student questions regarding financial aid.  Distributed and discussed paper titled, ‘Warning: Being on Academic Probation Does Affect Financial Aid’  Distributed ‘’Financial Aid Myths’’ pamphlet

18 Campus Resources Distributed and discussed the ‘SSP Contact Information’ Handout Distributed and discussed the ‘Campus Resources’ Handout Including program-provided math & English tutoring Showed dates and deadlines in SMC catalog (encouraged the students to buy one) and the Schedule of Classes. Showed Student Planning Guide and where to get it on-line. Showed Student Planner—buy in the bookstore.

19 Demographic Characteristics Probationary Student Orientation Participants

20 Orientation Participation 29% of invited probationary students attended orientation. 80% were strictly on academic probation (< 2.0 GPA) 315 students completed the College Student Inventory

21 Gender & Ethnicity No Gender X Ethnicity differences found for participation. Attendees were predominantly Latino (39%). However, they constitute 26% of SMC students. Age: 93% were 22 or younger (M = 19.5, SD = 3.5).

22 Demographics (cont.) Male and females differed on self-reported HS GPA (Female: 2.8 vs. 2.7, p <.05). Ethnic differences in Distance traveled, travel time, and self-reported HS GPA (p <.05). Mode of Transportation: 27% use public transportation to get to the college; 55% drive; 13% are driven by another person; and 5% walk or ride a bike.

23 Course-Taking Characteristics

24 Research Findings

25 Evaluation Results Generally satisfied with orientation Few students displeased (“I already know this”) Reasons given for being on probation were assessed in terms of attribution theory with four areas (and a general-non-categorized) identified: Course Specific Internal-Stable-Specific Attributions Internal-Unstable-Specific Attributions External-Stable-Specific Attributions External-Unstable-Specific Attributions

26 Course Specific Attributions Student states “obvious” reasons for lack of success (e.g., probationary status) in the following ways: Withdrew from too many courses Low Grade Point Average

27 Internal-Stable-Specific Attributions Student identifies an aspect of him/herself which contributed to poor performance, and seems to impact only a given course or only college. Lack of Academic Preparation for Course Adjustment to college Too much fun Lateness or attendance problems Enrolling in too many classes

28 Student identifies an aspect of him/herself which contributed to poor performance in course, but not other aspects of school. Lack of Enthusiasm or Interest in the Course Internal-Stable-Specific Attributions

29 External-Stable-Specific Attributions Student states specific conflicts that contributed to poor performance and attributes lack of success to these entities. Persistent Work Conflicts “Another person made me do it” Unreliable transportation/Distance

30 External-Unstable-Specific Attributions Student states multiple conflicts that contributed to poor performance, but did not affect other aspects of life. Poor performance (changed throughout) in class Lack of studying Poor time management Family, personal, financial problems

31 College Student Inventory Preliminary Outcomes for Gender, Ethnicity & Mode of Transportation

32 Multivariate Analysis of Covariance for Gender & Ethnicity High school GPA used as covariate Significant multivariate effects for Gender: Academic Motivation scales Significant multivariate effects for Ethnicity: Composite CSI scales Academic Motivation scales General Coping scales Receptivity to Support Services

33 Analysis of Covariance for Composite Scales Ethnic differences in dropout proneness, predicted academic difficulty, and educational receptivity. Educational stress, not significant. Latino students are most likely to dropout and experience academic difficulties; however, are also more willing to accept assistance. Asian students are under somewhat more educational stress than other students.

34 Analysis of Covariance for Academic Motivation Scales Consistent with theory, students with poor academic achievement, these students generally express a low tolerance toward instructors. Latino’s had a slightly more favorable impressions than other students. African American students had the least impression. White students expressed a higher degree of verbal confidence compared to African American and Latino students. This is particularly crucial as it impacts students’ attitudes and subsequent success in courses where extensive reading, writing, and public speaking is expected. Regardless of ethnicity, females expressed a higher degree of intellectual interests (i.e., enjoys the learning process). Men, on the other hand, expressed higher degrees on confidence in their perceived capacity to do well in math and science, and where communication skills are highly emphasized.

35 Analysis of Covariance for General Coping Scales No statistically significant differences were found for gender or ethnicity in the General Coping scales. This indicates that all students have developed similar coping mechanisms, albeit not particularly favorable. As such, counselors must work all the harder with these students through personal work as we strive to find the “flashpoint” (Hirsch, 2001) to effect change and ensure student success.

36 Analysis of Covariance for Receptivity for Institutional Help Scales African American and Latino students are more receptive to discuss means by which to increase financial resources to pay for college and to receive academic assistance. Asian students express a higher need to discuss problems of a personal nature (e.g., personal problems, dating, family problems, school) with a counselor. This finding is consistent with their high degree of educational stress. Latino students are more willing to readily to engage in the social communities of the college by meeting other people and participating in group experiences.

37 Multivariate Analysis of Covariance for Mode of Transportation & Ethnicity Significant multivariate effects for Mode of Transportation and Ethnicity: Composite CSI scales Academic Motivation scales (Gender & Ethnicity) Receptivity to Support Services

38 Analysis of Covariance for Composite Scales Mode of transportation differences found for dropout proneness, predicted academic difficulty, and receptivity to institutional help. Not surprising, students commuting by public transportation are more likely to dropout and experience academic difficulties. However, they are more willing to receive assistance.

39 Analysis of Covariance for Receptivity for Institutional Help Scales Students coming to the college using public transportation expressed a higher willingness to receive financial guidance and personal counseling, compared to those that drive. This finding is particularly important as lack of finances is likely to impact students’ ability to get to the college and lead to significant stress and perceived lack of control.

40 MANCOVA Results

41 ANCOVA Results

42 Estimated Means

43 Recommendations To facilitate student success, we must: Commit to a culture promoting student success Develop highly-structured programs or intervention strategies with intensive student contact Adopt an intrusive/developmental counseling framework to work with at-risk students Provide appropriate and ongoing training and support for counselors working with at-risk students Includes multicultural understanding, intrusive/developmental advisement skills, and academic success skill strategies (e.g., overcoming procrastination, increasing intrinsic motivation) Rewards and recognitions for at-risk students Promote evaluation of institutional programs through action research.

44 References Astin, A. (1993). What matters in college: Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Basham, V., & Lunenburg, F. (2001, Aug.). Usefulness of the College Student Inventory as a needs assessment tool in community colleges. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council of Professors in Educational Administration. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED457211) Hirsch, G. (2001). Helping college students succeed. Philadelphia: Brunner- Routledge. Pascarella, E., & Terenzini, P. (1991). How college affects students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Stratil, M. (1988). College Student Inventory. Coralville, IA: Noel-Levitz. Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student retention. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

45

46

47

48

49

50

51