Performance during the first year of college and in introductory courses has been widely identified as critical to college students’ retention and success. Accordingly, interventions to assist beginning college students in gateway courses have gained increased attention in higher education. This study tested such an intervention using learning analytics and early performance feedback in large introductory courses, with comparison between course sections not exposed to the intervention. Distinct from other research, the present study replicated the efficacy of the intervention across 2 years, in multiple course subjects, and with different instructors at a 4-year Hispanic-serving institution. Importantly, findings also showed that high-risk college students especially benefitted from the intervention in terms of both achievement and persistence. Based on these findings, recommendations are made to higher education administrators about the potential gains to students when they are provided with early, consistent, and individualized feedback in all courses, made feasible by current technology.
BajwaN.GujjarA. A.ShaheenG.RamzanM. (2011).
A comparative study of the study habits of the students from formal and non-formal systems of education in Pakistan. International Journal of Business and Social Science,
2(14), 175–186.
2.
BevittD.BaldwinC.CalvertJ. (2010).
Intervening early: Attendance and performance monitoring as a trigger for first year support in the biosciences.Bioscience Education,
15(4), 1–14. Retrieved from https://eprint.ncl.ac.uk/pub_details2.aspx?pub_id=156088
3.
DuckworthA. L.QuinnP. D. (2009).
Development and validation of the Short Grit Scale (Grit-S).Journal of Personality Assessment,
9(2), 166–174. doi:10.1080/00223890802634290
4.
FlandersG. R. (2015).
The effect of gateway course completion on freshman college student retention.Journal of College Student Retention,
19(1), 2–24. doi:10.1177/1521025115611396
5.
FreemanS.EddyS. L.McDonoughM.SmithM. K.OkoroaforN.JordtH.WenderothM. P. (2014).
Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics.PNAS,
111(23), 8410–8415. doi:10.1073/pnas.1319030111
JayaprakashS. M.MoodyE. W.LauríaE. J. M.ReganJ. R.BaronJ. D. (2014).
Early alert of academically at-risk students: An open source analytics initiative.Journal of Learning Analytics,
1(1), 6–47. doi:10.18608/jla.2014.11.3
8.
KuhG. D.KinzieJ.BuckleyJ. A.BridgesB. K.HayekJ. C. (2006). What matters to student success: A review of the literature. Washington, DC:
National Postsecondary Education Cooperative. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/npec/pdf/kuh_team_report.pdf
MidgleyC.ArunkumarR.UrdanT. C. (1996).
“If I don’t do well tomorrow, there’s a reason”: Predicting adolescents’ use of academic self-handicapping strategies.Journal of Educational Psychology,
88(3), 423–434.
12.
MuseusS. D.MarambaD. C. (2011).
The impact of culture on Filipino American students’ sense of belonging. The Review of Higher Education,
34(2), 231–258. doi:10.1353/rhe.2010.0022
13.
NuñezA.-M. (2009).
Latino students’ transitions to college: A social and intercultural capital perspective.Harvard Educational Review,
79(1), 22–48.
14.
NurmiJ.-E.AunolaK.Salmela-AroK.LindroosM. (2003).
The role of success expectation and task-avoidance in academic performance and satisfaction: Three studies on antecedents, consequences, and correlates.Contemporary Educational Psychology,
28, 59–90.
15.
PiccianoA. G. (2012).
The evolution of big data and learning analytics in American higher education.Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks,
16(3), 9–20. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ982669.pdf
16.
PrinceM. (2004).
Does active learning work? A review of the research.Journal of Engineering Education,
93(3), 223–231. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
17.
SchreinerL. A.NoelP.AndersonE. C.CantwellL. (2011).
The impact of faculty and staff on high-risk college student persistence.Journal of College Student Development,
52(3), 321–338.
18.
TampkeD. R. (2013).
Developing, implementing, and assessing an early alert system.Journal of College Student Retention,
14(4), 523–532. doi:10.2190/CS.14.4.e
19.
TwiggC. A. (2005). Increasing success for underserved students: Redesigning introductory courses. Retrieved from The National Center for Academic Transformation website: http://www.thencat.org/Monographs/IncSuccess.htm
20.
ValentineJ. C.HirschyA. S.BremerC. D.NovilloW.CastellanoM.BanisterA. (2011).
Keeping at-risk students in school: A systematic review of college retention programs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,
33(2), 214–234. doi:10.3102/0162373711398126
21.
WagnerE. P.SasserH.DiBiaseW. J. (2002).
Predicting students at risk in general chemistry using pre-semester assessments and demographic information.Journal of Chemical Education Research,
79(6), 749–755. doi:10.1021/ed079p749
22.
WibrowskiC. R.MatthewsW. K.KitsantasA. (2016).
The role of a skills learning support program on first-generation college students’ self-regulation, motivation, and academic achievement: A longitudinal study.Journal of College Student Retention,
19(3), 317–332. doi:10.1177/1521025116629152
23.
ZepkeN.LeachL. (2010).
Improving student engagement: Ten proposals for action.Active Learning in Higher Education,
11(3), 167–177. doi:10.1177/1469787410379680
24.
ZimmermanB. J.BanduraA.Martinez-PonsM. (1992).
Self-motivation for academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting.American Educational Research Journal,
29(3), 663–676.
