Guiding Math Students to Campus Services: An Impact Evaluation of the Beacon Program at South Texas College
Visher, Mary; Butcher, Kristin F.; Cerna, Oscar S. (2011). Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED517927
-
examining1,289Students, gradePS
Strategies for Postsecondary Students in Developmental Education–A Practice Guide for College and University Administrators, Advisors, and Faculty
Review Details
Reviewed: February 2024
Strategies for Postsecondary Students in Developmental Education–A Practice Guide for College and University Administrators, Advisors, and Faculty Practice Guide- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
GPA |
Beacon Mentoring program vs. Business as usual |
0 Semesters |
Students in developmental classes;
|
1.83 |
1.78 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Credits earned |
Beacon Mentoring program vs. Business as usual |
0 Semesters |
Students in developmental classes;
|
6.09 |
5.55 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Math course pass rate |
Beacon Mentoring program vs. Business as usual |
0 Semesters |
Students in developmental classes;
|
50.70 |
47.60 |
No |
-- |
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Urban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Texas
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in a South Texas College with students struggling students in developmental and regular math courses.
Study sample
The entire study included a total of 83 class sections, including 2, 165 students targeted as they were considered struggling students. Specific sample characteristics for just students in the developmental education classes are not reported. For the overall sample, 70.7% were under the age of 24, 57.6% were female, and 47.3% were part time students.
Intervention Group
The intervention used was called the Beacon Mentoring program. This program is considered a 'soft-touch' program as mentors were assigned to each class section in the treatment group. Mentors were 41 college employees who worked on campus and had previously participated in a training program to be mentors. The mentors arranged with the math instructor to meet with their class three or four times during the semester for 5 - 10 minutes at the beginning of class. The mentor would hand out information on campus resources and notify students of important dates. The mentor sometimes went with the class to the student success center, the financial aid office, or other useful areas on campus. The mentors shared their email address, office location, and office number with students and encouraged them to contact or visit them if they needed anything. The mentors reminded students about registration towards the end of the semester.
Comparison Group
The comparison group class sections did not receive a mentor and had regular course instruction.
Support for implementation
The study measured and reported on treatment implementation. It was reported that the treatment was implemented with a reasonable degree of fidelity.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).