Accelerating the Path to Degree Completion and Increasing Retention Through STEM Scholars Step-Up Bridge Program.

1. Accelerating the Path to Degree Completion
and Increasing Retention through STEM
Scholars Step-Up Bridge Program
AFACCT 22nd Annual Conference
January 5, 2012
Session 1.7
Supawan King, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Math
Chris Jones, Assistant Professor of Math
Harford Community College

2. Presentation Overview
 STEM Scholar Step-Up Bridge Program
 Mathematics Curriculum
 Tracking of Students
 Student Feedback & Next Steps
 Questions
2 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

3. STEM Scholar Step-Up Bridge
Program
 STEM Programs at HCC
 STEM Scholar Step-Up Bridge program and
Curriculum Design
 Selection of population
 Anticipated Outcomes
3 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

4. HCC STEM Programs
HCC STEM Programs
 Math, Biology, Chemistry, Engineering,
Environmental Science, Engineering Technology,
CADD, Biotechnology
 Fall 2011 majors: Engineering: 181; Biology 141;
Engineering Technology: 61; Chemistry: 46
 Strong STEM focus regionally and nationally
 Concerns: looming workforce shortages in STEM
fields combined with declining student interest
and readiness for STEM fields
4 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

5. HCC STEM Vision/Goals
HCC STEM Vision/Goals
 Meet regional needs for a prepared STEM
workforce by:
 Increasing number of students pursuing STEM
degrees
 Ensuring students are prepared to be successful
 Supporting degree completion
5 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

6. STEM Bridge Program Design
STEM Bridge Program Design
 First year design:
 3 weeks, five days per week, 8 hour days
 Fully integrated program
 Developed career awareness and strengthened skills
in English, math, research, and academic skills
 Daily, each morning: math and English; afternoons:
science, labs
 Daily lunch conversations with scientists and
engineerings
6 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

7. Program Design
Program Design
 Second year program design:
 Two tracks, Engineering and Science
 Enrolled higher numbers of engineering majors
 Daily lunches with guest speakers very popular
 Third year program design:
 Increased focus on engineering; majority of
students enrolled were engineering majors
 Four weeks, three days per week
 Increased math content, integrated
English/research into science/engineering content
7 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

8. Selection of Population
Selection of Population
 Mailed letters to homes; well publicized; worked
with advising; sent brochures to high schools
 First year: targeted incoming STEM majors who
tested just at or below college level math
 Second and third year: targeted all incoming
STEM majors, since focus included engineering
majors who need to be calculus ready in first
semester
8 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

9. Anticipated Outcomes
Anticipated Outcomes
 Retain students in STEM majors through degree
completion by:
 Shortening time to degree completion by advancing
placements in math
 Connecting students to each other, to resources, to
the STEM community
 Strengthening academic skills
 Increasing knowledge of various STEM careers
9 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

10. Mathematics Curriculum
 Mathematics Curriculum Development
 Pre-Assessment
 Daily Lectures & MyMathTest
 Post-Assessment
 Math Placement
 Over-expectation of student’s math skill
 Curriculum Redesign
 Algebra Track
 Function Track
10 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

11. Math Curriculum Redesign
Math 002
Intro to Algebra
Math 017
Intermediate
Algebra
Algebra Algebra Post-
Track Assessment
Math 101
College Algebra
Pre- Math 103
Assessment Trigonometry
Math 109
Pre-Calculus
Function Function Post-
Track Assessment
Math 203
Calculus I
11 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

12. 12 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

13. Tracking of Students
 Population: Bridge Students
 Summer 2009: n = 20 (F=3, M=17, HS=1)
 Summer 2010: n = 19 (F=6, M=14, HS=2)
 Data collected from Fall 2009 to Spring 2011
 Student Performance
 Student Success: Retention, Completion, and
Transfer
 Reduction in Time to Completion
13 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

14. Student Performance
4.0 3.89 GPA by Degree
(Spring 2011, n = 36, College Average = 2.85)
3.21 3.25
3.16
3.03
3.00 3.02 2.97
2.89 2.90 2.93
3.0 2.86
2.74
2.82
2.74 2.80 2.77
2.72 2.66 2.70
2.56
2.46 2.40
2.27
2.0
1.0
0.0
14 Bridge STEM AFACCT, January 5, 2012

15. Student Performance
GPA
(Spring 2011, n = 36, , College Average = 2.85)
3.5
2.99
3.0 2.90 2.88
2.71 2.71
2.64
2.5
2.0
Sci, Engr, & Math Technology Non STEM
Bridge Overall AFACCT, January 5, 2012
15

16. Student Success - Performance
Of 39 Bridge students STEM Bridge Students Overall
(2009-2010, n = 39)
 15.8% initially success
 66% success 14 13
 11% fail, and 12
12
Initiallly Success
 8% withdraw 10
Success
8
Fail
6 Withdraw from the
4 program
4 3
2 2 2
2 1
0
2009 2010
16 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

17. Student Success in Math -
Performance
 80% of successful Bridge students passed subsequent
Math courses
Student Success overall by Degree Student Success in Math by Degree
(2009-2010, n = 36) (2009-2010, n = 31)
100%
2 Non STEM
90% 10%
80% 2 Technology
1 10%
70%
60%
22
50%
Fail
Sci, Engr, &
40% 2 Math
30% Success
80%
1
20%
10% 5 1 Initial
0% Success
Sci, Engr, & Technology Non STEM
Math
17 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

18. Success of Math Intervention
 > 80% of Bridge students Student Success in Math Requirements
are successful in Math 100%
courses 90%
88.2%
85.7%
83.3%
80% 72.8% 72.7% 72.8%
 94% of Bridge students 70%
with no change in their
60%
initial Math placement are
successful 50%
40%
 80% of Bridge students 30%
placed one or two 20%
levels up in Math courses 10%
are successful 0%
2009 2010 Overall
Bridge Students STEM Students
18 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

19. Student Success after Bridge
Placement
Success in Math Courses after Bridge Placement
(n = 36)
100% 1
90% 3 1
80%
70%
60%
50% 16 Fail
40% 11 4 Success
30%
20%
10%
0%
No Change 1-level up 2-level up
19 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

20. Student Success after Bridge
Placement
No Change in Math Placement 1-Level up of Math Placement
(n = 17) (n = 14)
12
10 6
5 5 5 5
10 9
5
8 4
6 3
4 3 3 2
2 1 1
2 1 1
0 0
Trans 100 Level 200 Level Trans 100 Level 200 Level
2-Level up of Math Placement
(n = 5)
4
3
3
2
2 SM
1 SM&S
1
0
0
20 Trans 100 Level AFACCT, January 5, 2012

21. Student Success after Bridge
Placement
Transitional Level Initial Math 100 Level Initial Math Placement
Placement (n = 16) (n = 10)
6 6
5 5 5 5
5 5
4 4
3 3 3
3 3
2 2
2 2
1 1
1 1
0
0 0
No Change 1-level up 2-level up No Change 1-level up 2-level up
200 Level Initial Math Placement
(n = 11)
12
10
10 9
8
6 Math
4 Math & Overall
2 1 1
21 0 AFACCT, January 5, 2012
No Change 1-level up

22. Student Success after Bridge
Placement
Success in Math & Overall
(n=31)
100.0%
100%
90%
80.6%
80% 75.0%
70%
60%
50.0%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
No Change 1-level up 2-level up Overall
22 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

23. Student Success after Bridge
Placement (Summary)
Program Population 2009-2010
(n =36 + 3 withdrew)
with no change in
Success Overall (31) 92.3% 33.3%
Math Placement (12)
with 1-level up in Math
Success in Math (25) 69.4% 30.6%
Placement (11)
Success Overall & with 2-level up in
80.6% 5.6%
Math (25/31) Math Placement (2)
23 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

24. Bridge Student Status
Student Status as of Fall 2011
(n = 39)
Withdrew
No Record 8%
10%
Graduate
5%
Transfer
Current
18%
59%
24 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

25. Summary
The STEM Scholars Bridge program is successful in:
 Closing gaps in content knowledge
 Preparing students with college-ready skills
 Reducing time to completion
25 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

26. Student Feedback
&
Next Steps
26 AFACCT, January 5, 2012

27. Contact
 STEM Division: STEM@harford.edu
 Deborah Wrobel, Dean of STEM
(443) 412-2240 dwrobel@harford.edu
 Supawan King, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Math
(443) 412-2601 sking@harford.edu
 Chris Jones, Assistant Professor of Math
(443) 412-2055 cjones@harford.edu
27 AFACCT, January 5, 2012