The document discusses a study examining persistence factors of students in an online 2+2 university center teacher education program. The study uses qualitative methods to explore student perceptions of their experiences, with a focus on advising, instruction, and support structures. Key findings indicate that advisor support, convenience of the online format, instructor support, cohort support, and financial aid were most influential in students' persistence in the program. The goal of the research is to understand these persistence factors to help develop retention strategies for the 2+2 online teacher education model.

1. Laura Bilbro-Berry and Kathy Bradley
AACTE Annual Meeting
February 25, 2016

2.  National and state teacher shortages have
prompted mandates for production by public
institutions.
 In response to the shortages and mandates,
varied pathways into teacher education have
been created.
 2+2 university center model was developed as a
pathway to increase production.
 The current economic climate has created
pressure on recruitment of 2+2 university center
students.
 Understanding how to promote persistence
within the model toward successful completion
is a first step in creating retention policies.

3. The study examines persistence factors of a
population of online 2+2 university center students
by exploring student perceptions about their
experiences to include advising and support
structures. An understanding of the factors that
best motivate students to persist and be successful
within the online 2+2 university center teacher
education model is the goal of the qualitative
research such that information gleaned can be a
first step in the development of critical retention
strategies for the 2+2 university center model
within teacher education.

4. Macro-level theoretical frame
 Tinto’s(1975;1987;1997;2012) Theory of
Persistence
 Student characteristics
 Academic integration
 Social integration
 Institutional factors (Tinto, 2012)
 Persistence and Adult Learners
 Persistence at Community Colleges

5. Micro-level theoretical frame
 Wenger’s (1998) Communities of Practice
 Learning through communities and cohort
support
 Social Interactions and persistence

6.  Site Description
 At East Carolina University
 Within SECU Partnership East degree completion
model
 Elementary majors (N=24)
 Sample Description
 Transfer from community college
 Students within cohorts
 Non-traditional students who are employed and
completing degrees part-time and online
 Primarily Caucasian females who live in rural
areas

7.  Supply and Demand and the Teacher Shortage
Hussar & Bailey(2011);Noel-Levitz (2007);Ludwig, et al.(2010);Guarina,
Santibanez, & Dale (2006);Smethem (2007); King (2006);Evans (1993)
 Production Mandates and the Role of Teacher
Education Programs
Noel-Levitz (2007); Education Commission of the States, 2001)
 The University Center 2+2 Model
Gerdman (2001);Coulter & Vandal (2007);Butterfield & Ciampa (2006);Floyd
& Arnauld(2007); Locklear, Davis, & Covington (2009); Lys, Covington, Bilbro-
Berry, 2011)
 Issues of Retention within DE Programs
Boston,Ice, & Gibson(2011);Drouin & Vartanian;Cowan (2012);
Hagedorn(2005);Bean(2005);Heyman (2008)

8. Survey Question - Which of
following is influential in
your continued
participation in PE? No Yes
Support from
classmates/cohort members 31.80% 68.20%
Convenience of course
delivery 6.13% 93.87%
Faculty support 47.89% 52.11%
Financial aid received or
plan to receive 44.83% 55.17%
Assistance from PE advisor 19.16% 80.84%
Faculty to teach my classes 79.31% 20.69%
Other 95.79% 4.21%

9. Survey Questions:
Overall
(Poor=1;Outstanding=5) 1 2 3 4 5 Mean(SD)
Overall Advising Rating 0.39% 1.95% 6.61% 24.12% 66.93% 4.55(0.74)
Overall Instruction
Rating 0.00% 0.78% 10.16% 47.27% 41.80% 4.30(0.68)
Overall Support Rating 1.22% 10.98% 45.12% 42.28% 0.00% 3.28(0.74)

10. Central Question: What factors have been most
influential in your continued persistence as online
student within the SECU Partnership East degree
completion program?
 Subquestions:
 Why did you choose to join the online, 2+2 degree
completion program?
 What has been a helpful resource to you as a distance
education student?
 Is there anything about your experience as a distance
education student that you would change? If so, what?
 How has your advisor impacted your experience as a
distance education student?

11. Hierarchal Name
Percent of Total Coded
Responses
Advisor Support 21.17%
Convenience 13.37%
Instructor Support 12.45%
Quality of Program 6.03%
Financial Support 5.97%
Technology/Social Media 5.84%
Cohort Support 4.19%
Family/Other 1.98%

12. Students indicated advisor support was
important in regards to 3 areas:
Motivation
Information
Accessibility

13.  He sent us Monday motivations, just to keep our
head above water when we felt like we were
sinking he was always there!
 She made it seem so manageable. You can do
this! I remember calling her and saying, “When I
have a third baby….Should I have a 3rd baby?
Can I do this with a 3rd baby? Can I manage all
this?” and she said, “You’re fine.”
 She just put me in touch with someone who
could just put me at ease and realize that you
can have this life outside of school and it is
manageable.

14.  If he didn’t know an answer he was like, “I’m
going find out and I’ll let you know as soon as
possible.” He’d get an answer. So he was always
there for us too.
 She sent out flyers to our schools and the
principal put it in our boxes…
 I sent the parking e-mail this morning to my
advisor to ask him about it because he is always
very responsive… he is great about reminding
you of what is coming up. And he has the
forethought to say, “hey, this is coming in two
weeks or get ready for this…”

15.  The advisors were willing to do anything we
needed, you didn’t have to come to the office.
They were willing to meet you any way. That’s a
big deal especially if you have little kids, a bad
schedule or something…they were willing to
meet you any way possible.
 And we always expressed these last minute
questions and then our advisor will always be
right there at the computer and shoot emails out
and we would shoot each other emails about
what the advisor said telling them this is what
you need to do.

16.  I think having the same people in place at East
Carolina … really helped because we really felt closer
to our own instructors...being able to send a quick
email saying, “I’m having a problem with this and she
(instructor) would always be like oh, here, you need
to call me, here’s my number.
 Good instructors and accessibility when there was an
issue. I remember calling Dr. Y or calling any
professor and they were always there to help. I feel
like they were there because they wanted us to be
successful. They weren’t there to “get us.” They
were there to see us through. Personally, there were
some professors that made me want to say, “I want
to be you when I grow up.” I feel like they really
helped us a lot.

17.  You can’t do this in isolation because we are
geographically separated, away from our teachers…
we’re doing everything virtually in Blackboard…so I
think that that’s something with you guys putting us
in a group and making those kind of connections with
each other, was good.
 We also have a Facebook group, and any questions
that we have, we’ll post it and we use it to talk to
each other and spread information. We are able to
post questions and have them answered. If we have a
question, one person e-mailed Mr. S and that person
posts the answer on the Facebook wall. For example
when you e-mailed us about the parking today, we
posted it in the Facebook group immediately. Not
only did we get an email from you but everyone
posted on the FB wall.

18.  The convenience of it... A lot of us have had babies… I
came home from the hospital and I did something (online)
that night but nobody knew that I’d just had a baby…so
the convenience of turning in something when you needed
to ….is a big deal!
 There was no way I could have done it without being
online, I had small children…lots of them (she has 4) and I
can’t take time to go to a university to be part of a
program. That’s just impossible. My husband works nights
and weekends. I had to be able to be home and do it when
I could do it. I wanted it to be very credible. I was told
that it was going to be as good as if I were seated here (on
campus) at the university.
 It’s an amazing program for people that are non-traditional
and who want to have families. I remember cooking dinner
and submitting an assignment multiple times.

19. Convenience is important.
Social interaction to include
support from advisors, peers and
faculty impact persistence.
To support students best,
advisors need to find a balance
of providing motivation and
information while being
accessible.

20. Replication with larger sample
to include special education &
middle grades majors
Revisions to the PE Status Survey
Retention policy development
based on findings

21. Laura Bilbro-Berry
bilbroberryl@ecu.edu
Kathy Bradley
bradleyk@ecu.edu
www.ecu.edu/pe

22.  Bean, J. (2005). Nine themes of college student retention. In A. Seidman (Ed.) College Student Retention: Formula for Student Success (pp. 215-
243). Connecticut: Praeger Publishers.
 Boston, W. E., Ice, P., & Gibson, A. M. (2011). Comprehensive assessment of student retention in online learning environments. Online Journal of
Distance Learning Administration, 14(1).
 Butterfield,J. & Ciampa, M. (2006). 2 + 2 = A successful formula for institutional partnerships. Community College Journal, 76(6), 42-46.
 Coulter, T. & Vandal, B. (May, 2007). Community colleges and teacher preparation: roles, issues and opportunities. Issue paper- Education
Commission of the States.
 Drouin, M. & Vartanian, L. ,(2010). Students’ feelings of and desire for sense of community in face-to-face and online courses. Quarterly Review of
Distance Education, 11(3), 147.
 Education Commission of the States, (November 2001). Community colleges' role in teacher preparation. policy issue. Center for Community
College Policy: Denver, CO.
 Evans, H. (1993). The choice of teaching as a career. Social and Economic Studies, 42(2), 225-242.
 Floyd, D. L. & Arnauld, C. (2007). An exploratory study of community college baccalaureate teacher education programs. Community College
Review, 35(1), 66-84. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.
 Gerdeman, R. D. (2001). ERIC review: The role of community colleges in training tomorrow's school teachers. Community College Review, 28(4),
62-76. doi: 10.1177/009155210102800404
 Guarino, C., Santibañez, L., & Daley,G. (2006). Teacher recruitment and retention: A review of the recent empirical literature. Review of
Educational Research, 76(2), 173-208.
 Hagedorn, L. (2005). SQUARE pegs. Change, 37(1), 22.
 Heyman, E. (2010). Overcoming student retention issues in higher education online programs. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration,
13(4).
 King, Bruce, E. (2011). A case study of a community college-to-university teacher recruitment partnership. Texas A&M University - Commerce).
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/884798914?accountid=10639
 Locklear, C. , Davis, M., Covington, V. (2009). Do university centers produce comparable teacher education candidates? Community College
Review, 36(3), 239-260.
 Lys, D., Covington, V. & Bilbro-Berry (February 2011). Four years later: reexamining the university center teacher preparation model .Proceedings
of the American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education 63rd Annual Meeting, San Diego, California.
 Noel-Levtiz. (January 2007). University of North Carolina system- teacher recruitment plan fourth draft (V3.3). Iowa City: Sims, R. & Crockett, K.
 Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 45(1), 89-125.
 Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
 Tinto, V. (2012). Completing college: rethinking institutional action. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
 Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UD: Cambridge University Press.