Through past experience, we have identified
three factors that support and retain students beginning their studies in STEM
fields:
1. Confidence and success
in mathematics
2. Having practical,
hands-on experience demonstrating and/or applying scientific principles.
3. Gratification in
knowing that their work can go beyond themselves and truly help others.
The following programs we envision for this
proposal are directed at creating opportunities for students wherein they
experience the above supporting factors in the context of creating a
sustainable future.
VI. Objectives
(a) The number of
students completing associate degrees or completing credits toward transfer to
a baccalaureate degree program in STEM fields will increase by 50% over the
course of the grant. We will also double
the number of Transfer Admission Guarantees in STEM majors.
See
Fig. 1.
(b) Students who
participate in the Precalculus Readiness
Seminar will experience an average
success rate in Precalculus that is 20% higher than
comparable math students who do not participate. In this way a success rate of 60% would
increase to one of 80%.
(c) Students who
participate in the Energy Laboratory
Academy will have an average success rate in physics laboratory courses that
is 20% higher than comparable non-participating students.
(d) Of the non-declared STEM majors
in each of the two summer courses, 35% will subsequently declare themselves STEM
majors.
(e) Over the course of
the grant, the number of students from underrepresented groups who enroll in
STEM programs will double from the level in 2006-07, by maintaining a steady increase of about 20% per year improvement from the
previous year.
|
2006-07 |
2007-08 |
2008-09 |
2009-10 |
2010-11 |
2011-12 |
|
384 |
390 |
462 |
547 |
648 |
768 |
Fig. 7 Underrepresented STEM Majors by
Academic Year: actual for 06-07; projected for subsequent years
(f) Students
participating in STEEP will be more likely to persist in a STEM pathway after
transfer than other STEM transfer students who were not in STEEP. This
objective will be measured using data from the California Partnership for
Achieving Student Success (Cal-PASS) data system.
VII. Workplan and Timeline for
First Year
|
Form and convene an External Advisory
Committee which includes members from industry, local transfer universities
and K-12 STEM educators. |
3/08-5/08 |
|
Develop curriculum for the |
4/08-8/08 |
|
Form a cadre of at least 10 student teaching
assistants per year for the summer Energy
Laboratory Academy and Precalculus
Preparedness Seminar who are current STEM majors or Cabrillo alumni who
are pursuing STEM majors at the university level. |
3/08-7/08 |
|
Recruit high school seniors and Cabrillo
students who have recently begun their studies for the summer |
4/08-7/08 |
|
Implement the first Energy Laboratory Academy that will result in at least 35% of the
students electing to major in a STEM field.
These will be students who had previously not intended to pursue a
STEM field. |
8/08 |
|
Recruit students who attempted but did not
pass Precalculus during the two previous semesters, for the Precalculus Preparedness Seminar. |
4/08-6/08 |
|
Implement the Precalculus Preparedness Seminar that will result in student
participants improving their mathematics skill to a level that will allow success
in Precalculus the following semester at a success rate 20% greater than
their non-participant counterparts. Of these students 35% will decide to
change their majors to a STEM field. |
7/08 |
|
Expand tutoring, counseling and facilitated
study groups during the summer to 30 hours per week in the |
6/08-8/08 |
|
Recruit students to participate as interns for
the Cabrillo Sustainability Team to collect and analyze carbon dioxide
production data, research and plan for reduction in carbon emissions and
implement and evaluate carbon reduction measures. |
8/08 |
|
Form partnerships with local industry and
research institutions to place students into internships and undergraduate
research opportunities at the rate of 5 per year for a total of at least 25
during the grant period. |
6/08-10/09 |
|
Make internship placements at universities
and with industry partners. |
8/08-12/08 |
|
Develop a project evaluation plan that will
chart several early indicators of students being transfer-prepared in a STEM
major, including persistence in the major, success in the major,
participation in an internship, participation as a tutor or workshop leader
and completing of the calculus sequence. |
4/08-1/09 |
|
Subsequent years will follow a similar
schedule. |
4/09- 3/13 |
IX. MEASURING PROGRAM OUTCOMES
Our
goal is to develop a succinct panel of key performance indicators that will
allow us to assess the effectiveness of our outreach strategies, our student
engagement strategies and our student learning & progress.
|
Indicator |
Areas Assessed |
Time Frame |
Goal |
|
Track
STEM majors |
Outreach |
Annual |
Increase
number of participating students
declaring a STEM major |
|
Number
of Transfer Admission Guarantees |
Progress |
Annual |
Increase
number |
|
Number
of STEEP |
Outreach |
Annual |
Increase
STEM majors, especially within underrepresented population |
|
Focus
groups |
Engagement |
Annual |
Increase
reported student engagement |
|
Skills
assessments |
Learning |
Twice per semester |
Increase
level of student mastery of course materials |
|
Survey
of student engagement & procedural knowledge |
Engagement |
Annual |
Establish
baseline and improve student engagement |
|
Number
of STEM units |
Progress |
Each semester |
Increase
average number of lifetime units and the rate of unit accumulation |
|
Track
number of transfers |
Progress |
Annual |
Use
the NSC (National Student Clearinghouse) database to identify former student
participant destinations |
Fig.
9 Key Performance Indicators for
|
Assessment and Evaluation: Figure 9 gives a nice overview of what outcomes you plan to measure but little indication of how you will do so. How will you carry out and respond to formative assessment of the project; assess each of the activities as you go along so that they can be amended as needed? |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The skills assessments, focus groups, survey of student
engagement and tracking of the number, retention and persistence of student
cohorts will all provide opportunities for multiple updates during the course of the year. It is
anticipated that these data updates will provide formative information that
may allow for mid-year adjustments and fine tuning of services. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Will all your assessment and evaluation be quantitative in nature?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The summative evaluation is largely quantitative but not all of
the evaluation will be quantitative. For instance, there will be multiple
opportunities for analyzing and responding to data about the processes during
the academic year, before any formal annual, summative report. For instance,
as annual cohorts are developed, descriptive statistics will be analyzed and
reported. Any patterns of interest (e.g., a gender imbalance) could be
pursued programmatically (e.g., increased targeted outreach efforts). |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Will there be qualitative methods used as well to enable you to determine some of the reasons for increase or decrease in student recruitment, retention or graduation (including transfer to four year institution prior to earning the AA degree)?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The student focus groups and survey of student engagement
and procedural knowledge will provide qualitative information that will shed
light on student perspectives, experiences and rationales. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Also please clarify the roles of the Director of Research and Planning and of the independent evaluator.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
For quantitative data, the Director of Research, Planning,
and Knowledge Systems (DRPKS) will perform database queries and extracts as
well as an initial review of descriptive statistics for key variables. The
independent evaluator will receive the extracted flat files, review the data
for accuracy, and complete the analysis with input and review from the DRPKS. For qualitative data, the DRPKS and the Principle
Investigator will design and implement surveys and focus groups, conducting
any data input and screening, and perform initial analyses. The independent
evaluator will consult on the design of qualitative assessments, assist with
data screening, and finalize analyses. The independent evaluator will attend periodic meetings
and be available for phone and email consultation as the need arises. The
independent evaluator will produce an annual report evaluating the data and
information collected in support of grant objectives. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Numbers Affected: Please supply a table similar to Table 7 (Underrepresented STEM Majors by Academic Year) indicating the total STEM majors by Academic Year predicted for the next five years. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Also how will you determine the number of students in STEEP? |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The number of students in STEEP will include those directly
participating in one of the specified programs, however during the enhanced
summer hours made possible by STEEP funding, a number of other students would
benefit from study center and computer lab availability. |